The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
The Women-Are-Wonderful Effect
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From Wikipedia:

Women-are-wonderful effect

The women-are-wonderful effect is the phenomenon found in psychological and sociological research which suggests that people associate more positive attributes with women compared to men. This bias reflects an emotional bias toward women as a general case. The phrase was coined by Alice Eagly and Antonio Mladinic in 1994 after finding that both male and female participants tend to assign positive traits to women, with female participants showing a far more pronounced bias. …

The authors supposed that the positive general evaluation of women might derive from the association between women and nurturing characteristics. This bias has been cited as an example of benevolent sexism.

The term was coined by researchers Alice Eagly and Antonio Mladinic in a 1994 paper, where they had questioned the widely-held view that there was prejudice against women. They observed that much of the research had been inconclusive in showing a bias. They had found a positive bias towards women in their 1989 and 1991 studies, which involved questionnaires given to students in the United States.[2] ….

In 1991, 324 psychology students of Purdue University were given questionnaires in groups of 20 and asked to assess subjects of both genders. They evaluated the social categories of men and women, relating the traits and expectations of each gender through interviews, emotion-associations and free-response measures. Women were rated higher in attitudes and beliefs but not emotions.[4]

Rudman & Goodwin (2004) conducted research on gender bias that measured gender preferences without directly asking the participants. Subjects at Purdue and Rutgers participated in computerized tasks that measured automatic attitudes based on how quickly a person categorizes pleasant and unpleasant attributes with each gender.

Implicit attitude testing.

Such a task was done to discover whether people associate pleasant words (good, happy, and sunshine) with women, and unpleasant words (bad, trouble, and pain) with men.

This research found that while both women and men have more favorable views of women, women’s in-group biases were 4.5 times stronger than those of men. And only women (not men) showed cognitive balance among in-group bias, identity, and self-esteem, revealing that men lack a mechanism that bolsters automatic preference for their own gender.

Other experiments in this study found people showed automatic preference for their mothers over their fathers, or associated the male gender with violence or aggression. Rudman and Goodwin’s suggested that maternal bonding and male intimidation influences gender attitudes.

Makes sense.

Another experiment in the study found adults’ attitudes were measured based on their reactions to categories associated with sexual relations. It revealed that among men who engaged more in sexual activity, the more positive their attitude towards sex, the larger their bias towards women. A greater interest in and liking of sex may promote automatic preference for the out-group of women among men, although both women and men with sexual experience expressed greater liking for the opposite gender.

It’s almost as if fraternizing with the enemy saps morale in the War of the Sexes.

One study found that the effect is mediated by increased gender equality. The mediation comes not from differences in attitudes towards women, but in attitudes towards men. In more egalitarian societies, people have more positive attitudes towards men than in less egalitarian societies.

If male intimidation is the behavior that elicits negative attitudes toward men, then in a more egalitarian society (I’m assuming Sweden as an example of what they mean by egalitarian), men tend to act less intimidating than in society’s where it seems like a fistfight is about to break out at any moment.

Some authors[who?] have claimed the “Women are wonderful” effect is applicable when women follow traditional gender roles such as child nurturing and stay-at-home housewife. However, other authors[who?] have cited studies indicating that the women-are-wonderful effect is still applicable even when women are in nontraditional gender roles, and the original Eagly, Mladinic & Otto (1991) study discovering the women-are-wonderful effect found no such ambivalence.

Several scholars[who?] have argued that the “women are wonderful” effect might be better phrased as “women are wonderful when” effect, with the “when” meaning when women are not in charge.

 
Hide 105 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Women are wonderful so long as they’re not in a position of authority over men.

    • Agree: Mike Tre, Dani
    • Replies: @Chrisnonymous
    @Trelane

    I would modify the statement slightly...

    I vacationed on the Japanese coast recently and one of the beachgoers was a young woman with a particularly scrumptious behind and particularly pale, untouched-by-sun skin. Apparently, either she couldn't reach around, or her suntan lotion assitant didn't have the guts to rub into her luscious derriere, because after an afternoon on the sand in the sun, all of her was still milky-white except her sumptuous rump, which was was sunburned badly. Clad in a green string bikini, a fit, pale body with a pink bouncing bum. This is one of the most wonderful sights of women I have seen.

    Women are wonderful....

    , @Ian Smith
    @Trelane

    https://lebeauleblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Exit-to-Eden-1.jpg

    Strongly disavow!

    , @ScarletNumber
    @Trelane

    Working in education, if you were to ask a woman if she would rather have a man boss or a woman boss, almost all of them would rather have a man boss.

    Replies: @Twinkie

  2. You don’t realize how far this conspiracy goes.

    From Mark Twain’s “The Innocents Abroad”

    …the Holy Personages rank thus in Rome:

    First–“The Mother of God”–otherwise the Virgin Mary.

    Second–The Deity.

    Third–Peter.

    Fourth–Some twelve or fifteen canonized Popes and martyrs.

    Fifth–Jesus Christ the Saviour–(but always as an infant in arms.)

    But really, the math is straightforward. One woman can produce one child per year, roughly, and that’s the full productive capacity of the nation. One man can impregnate nearly all of them. Men are expendable, so to hell with them. This view bleeds into everything, even things like religious sentiment that have nothing to do with whether girl rule and boys drool.

    • Agree: Rob McX
    • Replies: @middle-aged vet
    @onetwothree

    Mark Twain was vastly gifted but he had the capacity to be as stupid and as dishonest as any person who has ever lived long enough to write an awful lot of words, as the poor little man did.

    , @Anonymous
    @onetwothree

    Crap.

    No Arab etc ever thinks like that.

    Replies: @James J. O'Meara

  3. Anon[130] • Disclaimer says:

    Rediscovered by Ann Althouse, who frequently posts on it. From 2005:

    I’ve said it before, and I must repeat, the rule is: If you do scientific research into the differences between men and women, you must portray whatever you find to be true of women as superior. And when you read reports about scientific research into the differences between men and women, use the hypothesis that the scientists are following that rule. It makes reading the reports quite humorous.

    https://althouse.blogspot.com/2005/11/scientists-remember-to-portray.html

    From a 2020 study:

    More precisely, the aim is to evaluate two main hypotheses: (1) The Gender Tribalism Hypothesis: Men will be more positive toward male-favouring findings, women toward female-favouring findings. (2) The Althouse Rule Hypothesis: Both sexes will tend to be more positive toward female-favouring findings. (This is based on the law professor Ann Althouse’s suggestion that, in the modern Western world, it is socially acceptable to talk about female-favouring sex differences but not male-favouring differences.

    :
    :

    The law professor Ann Althouse (2005) alluded to this asymmetry when she observed that, if you want to do research on sex differences and avoid censure, you have to interpret any findings in such a way as to show that women are superior.

    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/334751470_Reactions_to_Male-Favouring_vs_Female-Favouring_Sex_Differences_A_Preregistered_Experiment_and_Southeast_Asian_Replication

    • Replies: @Rob McX
    @Anon


    The Althouse Rule Hypothesis: Both sexes will tend to be more positive toward female-favouring findings. (This is based on the law professor Ann Althouse’s suggestion that, in the modern Western world, it is socially acceptable to talk about female-favouring sex differences but not male-favouring differences.
     
    This rule can be extended to non-whites, homosexuals and transsexuals.
    , @Hypnotoad666
    @Anon

    In Western society, people think women are more moral. (Because our morality comes from mothers, and is based on ideals of empathy, self-sacrifice, etc.). But people think that men are more effective. (Because, mostly, they are.).

  4. It starts out this way: When you are a boy, Girls are Great. Then when you are a man, Women are Wonderful. It’s alliterative, you see.

    Truly, I agree with this part:

    Another experiment in the study found adults’ attitudes were measured based on their reactions to categories associated with sexual relations. It revealed that among men who engaged more in sexual activity, the more positive their attitude towards sex, the larger their bias towards women. A greater interest in and liking of sex may promote automatic preference for the out-group of women among men, although both women and men with sexual experience expressed greater liking for the opposite gender.

    And Steve’s reaction:

    It’s almost as if fraternizing with the enemy saps morale in the War of the Sexes.

    Yes, and, BTW, what war? Who really wants one, and who actually has tried to start one?

    • Replies: @Unintended Consequence
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Sailer and the other boomers had the Battle of the Sexes. It's why we're mostly missing a generation. Hard to procreate when you're vying for dominance. It might get better after they die out. I dunno.

    , @SFG
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Lesbians and to a much lesser extent gay men, I think. Damage enough young men’s self confidence and it opens up more opportunities for them. That’s kind of the idea behind a lot of feminism, especially the radfem kind, if you read between the lines.

  5. Several scholars[who?] have argued that the “women are wonderful” effect might be better phrased as “women are wonderful when” effect, with the “when” meaning when women are not in charge act like women.

    FIFT!

    You couldn’t do a study like this so easily today though, what with 57 genders and all. You’d need spreadsheets, statisticians, and A BIGGER BUDGET. YEA!!

    • Replies: @Jim Christian
    @Achmed E. Newman

    "Women Are Wonderful" translates to "Pussy Pass". In every way imaginable. What, Acchie, you never noticed? Ha! Finally gotcha! You must have a wonderful wife. She blinds you to reality!

    , @Rosie
    @Achmed E. Newman


    FIFT!
     
    Men are wonderful when they don’t presume to dictate what it means to act like a woman but recognize women as fully-fledged individual human beings with our own unique collection of interests, values, and traits.

    Seriously, why does anyone think it's OK to do this? Noone is required to like any particular person, and there is nothing wrong with a personal romantic interest in girly girls only. But why the need to constantly attack and demean women who don't conform to that?

    https://i0.wp.com/bbqrevolt.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/meat-grinders.jpg?fit=930%2C620&ssl=1

    I have never known women to act like this. Maybe that contributes to the women are wonderful effect.

    Replies: @HammerJack

  6. @Buzz Mohawk
    It starts out this way: When you are a boy, Girls are Great. Then when you are a man, Women are Wonderful. It's alliterative, you see.

    Truly, I agree with this part:

    Another experiment in the study found adults’ attitudes were measured based on their reactions to categories associated with sexual relations. It revealed that among men who engaged more in sexual activity, the more positive their attitude towards sex, the larger their bias towards women. A greater interest in and liking of sex may promote automatic preference for the out-group of women among men, although both women and men with sexual experience expressed greater liking for the opposite gender.
     
    And Steve's reaction:

    It’s almost as if fraternizing with the enemy saps morale in the War of the Sexes.
     
    Yes, and, BTW, what war? Who really wants one, and who actually has tried to start one?

    Replies: @Unintended Consequence, @SFG

    Sailer and the other boomers had the Battle of the Sexes. It’s why we’re mostly missing a generation. Hard to procreate when you’re vying for dominance. It might get better after they die out. I dunno.

  7. @Achmed E. Newman

    Several scholars[who?] have argued that the “women are wonderful” effect might be better phrased as “women are wonderful when” effect, with the “when” meaning when women are not in charge act like women.
     
    FIFT!

    You couldn't do a study like this so easily today though, what with 57 genders and all. You'd need spreadsheets, statisticians, and A BIGGER BUDGET. YEA!!

    Replies: @Jim Christian, @Rosie

    “Women Are Wonderful” translates to “Pussy Pass”. In every way imaginable. What, Acchie, you never noticed? Ha! Finally gotcha! You must have a wonderful wife. She blinds you to reality!

  8. Women can be unpleasant but they don’t try the intimidation/power trips you get from some men. I suspect that its a good part of the reason men are biased in favor of women (sex being the other).

    • LOL: Kylie
    • Replies: @al gore rhythms
    @Dutch Boy

    Women in the workplace can use the 'that's racist/sexist/transphobic' route to intimidate colleagues. But they cannot use personal intimidation which relies on physical presence.

    This is why PC office politics is popular with weak would-be bullies of either sex.

  9. The mysterious, three-way interface between the internets, Ron Unz’s software and my age-ing MacBook Air currently prevents me, as usual, from seeing any other comments or replies as yet, but I must add this without waiting:

    Women are indeed Wonderful. This statement of fact is especially relevant here on this HBD blog, with its appropriately ever-present emphasis on the major human races. You see, my experience has been that Women are Wonderful coming from Whatever place they happen to come from.

    What I mean is, women around the world share mostly the same orientations and drives that complement men! They are Women and they are Wonderful!

    (I just had to share that while sharing Mumm Napa champagne tonight with my Wonderful Woman from halfway around the world. In his speech yesterday in Dallas, Texas, prime minister Viktor Orbán of Hungary mentioned that the men in the audience should find Hungarian women and marry them. I agree.)

    • LOL: Jim Christian
    • Replies: @SFG
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Considering the relative populations of the USA and Hungary, that sounds like an awful deal for the Hungarian guys. But I imagine he was speaking metaphorically. You can imagine red pill American guys turning up in Hungary and realizing they can’t learn Hungarian though. (It’s a language isolate, almost, with Finnish apparently the closest relative.)

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk

  10. Didn’t seem to stop all those awful men in Indiana from voting against keeping abortion legal for all those fertile women in Hoosierville…

    • Replies: @Mark G.
    @Joe Stalin


    Didn’t seem to stop all those awful men in Indiana from voting against keeping abortion legal for all those fertile women in Hoosierville…
     
    I've lived here in Indiana my whole life, 66 years. Rather than some form of misogyny, that comes from the religiousness of Hoosiers. I once dated someone who had moved here to be a research scientist for a local drug company, Eli Lilly. She complained to me how religious people here are and how there are churches all over the place. Since I had spent my whole life here, I was barely aware of that in the same way a fish doesn't notice the water. If I was living somewhere where there were no churches, and everyone was an atheist, it would even feel a little weird to me.
  11. Well, that’s certainly different.

    • Replies: @Pixo
    @Joe Stalin

    I assume Ukraine hasn’t blown up the Crimea bridge for the same reason they haven’t hit Russia proper: the US told them not to if they want to keep the free weapons flowing.

    That barge doesn’t seem like it would do anything to prevent a GPS guided missile.

    If the Ukes really want to escalate, they can target nuclear power plants and oil refineries in Russia. That’s unwise of them of course, but illustrates how both sides have not engaged in any recent major escalations.

  12. @Achmed E. Newman

    Several scholars[who?] have argued that the “women are wonderful” effect might be better phrased as “women are wonderful when” effect, with the “when” meaning when women are not in charge act like women.
     
    FIFT!

    You couldn't do a study like this so easily today though, what with 57 genders and all. You'd need spreadsheets, statisticians, and A BIGGER BUDGET. YEA!!

    Replies: @Jim Christian, @Rosie

    FIFT!

    Men are wonderful when they don’t presume to dictate what it means to act like a woman but recognize women as fully-fledged individual human beings with our own unique collection of interests, values, and traits.

    Seriously, why does anyone think it’s OK to do this? Noone is required to like any particular person, and there is nothing wrong with a personal romantic interest in girly girls only. But why the need to constantly attack and demean women who don’t conform to that?

    https://i0.wp.com/bbqrevolt.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/meat-grinders.jpg?fit=930%2C620&ssl=1

    I have never known women to act like this. Maybe that contributes to the women are wonderful effect.

    • Replies: @HammerJack
    @Rosie

    Hey Rosie. What about black-on-white crime

    Replies: @HammerJack

  13. men lack a mechanism that bolsters automatic preference for their own gender.

    William Jennings Bryan wasn’t a progressive by today’s standards, but he was very important in the history of the progressive movement, and was enthusiastic about giving women the vote in the very early 20th century. This wasn’t because he saw them as victims who had been deprived of the vote, but because he saw them as superior moral beings, i.e., generally more dedicated to living a Christian life than men of that era were. (Men drank whiskey with their male friends.) He predicted a gigantic wave of Christian motivated voting once women were allowed to go to the polls in all the states. After the temperance movement, however, it didn’t really turn out that way, not in the long run.

    Of course, what women actually were (and still are) was much more acquiescent to the prevailing moral powers that be…Christian or otherwise. Women want to be liked more than men do, and – surprise surprise – people who want to be liked are generally more likeable than those who don’t. Bryan bought into the mythology of the female, and I’m sure their agreeableness and more gentle disposition helped fool him.

    • Replies: @nokangaroos
    @J1234

    Konrad Lorenz called it "the mousegreying of the male", arguing that in
    modern - post-neolithic - society male "display", self-assertion and
    self-actualization must be suppressed in the interest of social peace
    (leaving the necessary task of attracting wimmin to "conspicuous consumption"
    read: bling).
    It follows effortlessly that civilization breaks down as soon as women are "equal".

    Replies: @The Germ Theory of Disease

  14. I’m sorry, was there a point somewhere in all of this?

    • Replies: @HammerJack
    @Intelligent Dasein

    https://i.ibb.co/pRz8HRS/ecd05bf7012ce8170282959e9db06603fdde8758-14.jpg

    , @Twinkie
    @Intelligent Dasein


    I’m sorry, was there a point somewhere in all of this?
     
    You'll see a point if and when you have a wife and daughters.
  15. Hardbodied woman hoists 250-pound sandbag to her shoulder. How many “Men” of Unz could do that?
    https://www.youtube.com/shorts/M0i9W_kFomo

    • Thanks: Not Raul
    • Replies: @Jim Bob Lassiter
    @prosa123

    I bet she's got a cootchie that could . . .

    , @The Wild Geese Howard
    @prosa123


    Hardbodied woman hoists 250-pound sandbag to her shoulder.
     
    Because everything shown on TV is true.

    I wonder how complex her PED schedule is.
    , @anon
    @prosa123

    Just off the top of my head: Dave Pinsen, for one. Now that you've lifted her and her sandbag, go White Knight someplace else.

    Replies: @prosa123

  16. Many prefer their father to their mother.

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    @anon


    Many prefer their father to their mother.
     
    My parents would get drunk and then beat the shit out of each other in front of me, as far back as I remember.

    I always sided with my mother. It was instinct.

    They were upper-middle class parents. They just had a problem whereby they would sometimes drink too much and then make bloody scenes in front of me when I was a child.

    I always sided with my mother. It was instinct.

    As an adult, years later, I figured it out and realized they both were guilty, both instigating and drawing blood in front of me.

    I always sided with my mother. It was instinct.

    My father was a better person, solid, providing everything, doing everything he could for us. My mother began drunkenly turning on me and abusing me when I was nine or ten. My father never did that.

    I always sided with my mother. It was instinct.

    My father was there throughout my life when I needed him. My mother was insane before I reached adulthood and was no use at all. Even in the years before that, she was undependable when I needed her as a young child.

    Nevertheless, before I lived awhile as a man and finally figured out what had been going on, I always sided with my mother. It was instinct. I wanted to protect her from my father. I even tried when they were fighting and I was very young. My mother did her best to turn me against my own father.

    A boy instinctively wants to protect his mother. At least that is my experience. I believe that is part of being male. I lived it, even though in retrospect I realize my own mother did not deserve it.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Twinkie

  17. Isn’t it great the way Steve knows how to spark interest that multiplies comments? Here he simply grabbed something from Wikipedia that he knew would bring responses.

    He is a marketeer, after all.

    So here we are, enthusiastically posting about women, women vs. men, women as men see them, women and how we feel about them, women as women commenters respond and how men respond to the women commenters, etc.

    It’s great, and that’s just one more reason why we love Steve.

    Do it to us Steve! (Sorry, got carried away identifying with women for a moment.)

    Anyway, it’s August, so send money now. Lambo is hungry.

    PS: Women are Wonderful.

  18. @Intelligent Dasein
    I'm sorry, was there a point somewhere in all of this?

    Replies: @HammerJack, @Twinkie

  19. Next up, a controversial study claiming sexual dimorphism is real.

  20. @onetwothree
    You don't realize how far this conspiracy goes.

    From Mark Twain's "The Innocents Abroad"

    ...the Holy Personages rank thus in Rome:

    First--“The Mother of God"--otherwise the Virgin Mary.

    Second--The Deity.

    Third--Peter.

    Fourth--Some twelve or fifteen canonized Popes and martyrs.

    Fifth--Jesus Christ the Saviour--(but always as an infant in arms.)
     
    But really, the math is straightforward. One woman can produce one child per year, roughly, and that's the full productive capacity of the nation. One man can impregnate nearly all of them. Men are expendable, so to hell with them. This view bleeds into everything, even things like religious sentiment that have nothing to do with whether girl rule and boys drool.

    Replies: @middle-aged vet, @Anonymous

    Mark Twain was vastly gifted but he had the capacity to be as stupid and as dishonest as any person who has ever lived long enough to write an awful lot of words, as the poor little man did.

  21. @anon
    Many prefer their father to their mother.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk

    Many prefer their father to their mother.

    My parents would get drunk and then beat the shit out of each other in front of me, as far back as I remember.

    I always sided with my mother. It was instinct.

    They were upper-middle class parents. They just had a problem whereby they would sometimes drink too much and then make bloody scenes in front of me when I was a child.

    I always sided with my mother. It was instinct.

    As an adult, years later, I figured it out and realized they both were guilty, both instigating and drawing blood in front of me.

    I always sided with my mother. It was instinct.

    My father was a better person, solid, providing everything, doing everything he could for us. My mother began drunkenly turning on me and abusing me when I was nine or ten. My father never did that.

    I always sided with my mother. It was instinct.

    My father was there throughout my life when I needed him. My mother was insane before I reached adulthood and was no use at all. Even in the years before that, she was undependable when I needed her as a young child.

    Nevertheless, before I lived awhile as a man and finally figured out what had been going on, I always sided with my mother. It was instinct. I wanted to protect her from my father. I even tried when they were fighting and I was very young. My mother did her best to turn me against my own father.

    A boy instinctively wants to protect his mother. At least that is my experience. I believe that is part of being male. I lived it, even though in retrospect I realize my own mother did not deserve it.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @Buzz Mohawk


    A boy instinctively wants to protect his mother.
     
    That’s because you were a good boy.

    I knew boys who weren’t like that - they all turned out badly one way or another.
    , @Twinkie
    @Buzz Mohawk

    In my childhood memory, my father was a violent, temperamental alcoholic and my mother was a suffering saint. But then I began to appreciate aspects of my father (or at least the memory of them) much more once I too became a father.

    And some years after my father passed away, I realized that my mother was more passive-aggressive, petty, and annoying than I remembered from my childhood. My wife quipped, “Maybe your mom was so great in your youth, because your dad kept some of her negative impulses in check while he was alive.” She might be right.

    I still think more fondly of my mother than my departed father, but I empathize with and appreciate him more than I did before. My youthful harsh judgment of him is tempered now by the experiences of my own fatherhood and the sacrifices I made for my wife and children.

    Today I can say, without hesitation, that I forgive and love him. I just wish I had a chance to reconcile with him before he died. I hope, one day, God will grant me that opportunity.

    Replies: @R.G. Camara, @ScarletNumber

  22. Glad these folks did this study. Pretty much everyone–everyone sentient–is aware of this reality–despite all the feminist lying–but I had not realized someone had nailed down a decent study.

    These results are all per spec:
    — everyone has a mother
    — women are more nurturing
    — women are superficially nicer–more eager to please
    — every guy wants … uh “sexual congress”
    — men are fairer, more objective
    — men are in direct sexual competition–occasionally even violent competition–in a way that women simply are not
    — men and women who experiencing normal male-female complementarity, like it and will correspondingly have more positive attitudes toward the other sex; (Reading the early paragraphs I was thinking “i’d bet the results are better for people who are married or otherwise having sex regularly … sure ‘nough.)

    The one thing I wonder is if the male results toward women will stay as neutral. There is a much more obvious “men suck” vibe out there now from the feminists. (While, of course, still expecting the manana to rain down from heaven.) Furthermore, the behavior of young women just seems crappier, more self-involved, less appealing. My sense–old guy not in the trenches–is that young men have picked up on both these things and have a lower opinion of young women then we did back in the day.

    • Replies: @SFG
    @AnotherDad

    I’ve had people tell me that here, and it seems a subtext with a lot of the newer alt right stuff, but I haven’t seen a lot of hard evidence. That tends to be hard to find with incipient cultural shifts, though.

  23. @Anon
    Rediscovered by Ann Althouse, who frequently posts on it. From 2005:

    I've said it before, and I must repeat, the rule is: If you do scientific research into the differences between men and women, you must portray whatever you find to be true of women as superior. And when you read reports about scientific research into the differences between men and women, use the hypothesis that the scientists are following that rule. It makes reading the reports quite humorous.

    https://althouse.blogspot.com/2005/11/scientists-remember-to-portray.html
     
    From a 2020 study:

    More precisely, the aim is to evaluate two main hypotheses: (1) The Gender Tribalism Hypothesis: Men will be more positive toward male-favouring findings, women toward female-favouring findings. (2) The Althouse Rule Hypothesis: Both sexes will tend to be more positive toward female-favouring findings. (This is based on the law professor Ann Althouse’s suggestion that, in the modern Western world, it is socially acceptable to talk about female-favouring sex differences but not male-favouring differences.

    :
    :

    The law professor Ann Althouse (2005) alluded to this asymmetry when she observed that, if you want to do research on sex differences and avoid censure, you have to interpret any findings in such a way as to show that women are superior.

    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/334751470_Reactions_to_Male-Favouring_vs_Female-Favouring_Sex_Differences_A_Preregistered_Experiment_and_Southeast_Asian_Replication
     

    Replies: @Rob McX, @Hypnotoad666

    The Althouse Rule Hypothesis: Both sexes will tend to be more positive toward female-favouring findings. (This is based on the law professor Ann Althouse’s suggestion that, in the modern Western world, it is socially acceptable to talk about female-favouring sex differences but not male-favouring differences.

    This rule can be extended to non-whites, homosexuals and transsexuals.

    • Agree: Rich
  24. @Buzz Mohawk
    @anon


    Many prefer their father to their mother.
     
    My parents would get drunk and then beat the shit out of each other in front of me, as far back as I remember.

    I always sided with my mother. It was instinct.

    They were upper-middle class parents. They just had a problem whereby they would sometimes drink too much and then make bloody scenes in front of me when I was a child.

    I always sided with my mother. It was instinct.

    As an adult, years later, I figured it out and realized they both were guilty, both instigating and drawing blood in front of me.

    I always sided with my mother. It was instinct.

    My father was a better person, solid, providing everything, doing everything he could for us. My mother began drunkenly turning on me and abusing me when I was nine or ten. My father never did that.

    I always sided with my mother. It was instinct.

    My father was there throughout my life when I needed him. My mother was insane before I reached adulthood and was no use at all. Even in the years before that, she was undependable when I needed her as a young child.

    Nevertheless, before I lived awhile as a man and finally figured out what had been going on, I always sided with my mother. It was instinct. I wanted to protect her from my father. I even tried when they were fighting and I was very young. My mother did her best to turn me against my own father.

    A boy instinctively wants to protect his mother. At least that is my experience. I believe that is part of being male. I lived it, even though in retrospect I realize my own mother did not deserve it.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Twinkie

    A boy instinctively wants to protect his mother.

    That’s because you were a good boy.

    I knew boys who weren’t like that – they all turned out badly one way or another.

    • Thanks: Buzz Mohawk
  25. well the sexes are different so people see them different.

  26. When I started to read this post, including the first few lines of the quoted text, I thought, “Well, my kids all uniformly like my wife more than me…” and right on cue:

    Other experiments in this study found people showed automatic preference for their mothers over their fathers, or associated the male gender with violence or aggression. Rudman and Goodwin’s suggested that maternal bonding and male intimidation influences gender attitudes.

    On the other hand, when my wife sometimes gets agitated by the kids, she yells, “Will you please come over here and talk to them? They aren’t listening to me.” I come over, the kids scamper like cockroaches and trouble disappears. I guess I’m scarier (there’s that “intimidation”).

    It’s interesting, though, that even though the kids like their mom more, they know to whom to appeal when in danger. A few days ago, my wife and I were playing with the younger girls among my kids in the pool after dark and a bat started to hover over them. They screeched and hid behind me, not their mom.

    So, yeah, they like me less, but they definitely prefer me as the human shield. 🙂

    And I am more than okay with that! That’s the natural order of things.

    • Agree: RadicalCenter
  27. Anonymous[202] • Disclaimer says:

    All this does not accord with the ancient time honored perceptions of earlier times, or indeed attitudes still existing in the non western world; namely that women are, in general, envious, spiteful, deceitful, cunning, manipulative, ‘bitchy’ etc.
    A real dulling of perceptions and the separation of truth from lies and nonsense has occurred in the western world in the past century, which doesn’t say much for the future of the west, or the native abilities of the inhabitants of the west. Hence, why the west is and will remain such easy meat for the aggressive dark complected conquerors it is currently so eagerly inviting in.

    The best judge of any woman is another woman. If you really want to see what the female sex is all about, just observe how they interact with each other when in direct competition against each other for some desired result/outcome/male etc.

    • Replies: @Redneck farmer
    @Anonymous

    "A misogynist is a man who hates women as much as women hate other women".

  28. Anonymous[202] • Disclaimer says:
    @onetwothree
    You don't realize how far this conspiracy goes.

    From Mark Twain's "The Innocents Abroad"

    ...the Holy Personages rank thus in Rome:

    First--“The Mother of God"--otherwise the Virgin Mary.

    Second--The Deity.

    Third--Peter.

    Fourth--Some twelve or fifteen canonized Popes and martyrs.

    Fifth--Jesus Christ the Saviour--(but always as an infant in arms.)
     
    But really, the math is straightforward. One woman can produce one child per year, roughly, and that's the full productive capacity of the nation. One man can impregnate nearly all of them. Men are expendable, so to hell with them. This view bleeds into everything, even things like religious sentiment that have nothing to do with whether girl rule and boys drool.

    Replies: @middle-aged vet, @Anonymous

    Crap.

    No Arab etc ever thinks like that.

    • Agree: SIMP simp
    • Replies: @James J. O'Meara
    @Anonymous

    In general, or are you referring to the Holy Hierarchy mentioned by Twain?

    In Islam, Jesus is a (mere) prophet, as is Mohammed. But in Christianity, as the name implies, he's sort of like God. (Hence the ignorant Christian term "Mohammedan" as if Moslems worshipped Mohammed).

    Christians, like Woke Leftists (who derive from them), have no brakes or sense of proportion. As the centuries went by, Rabbi Jesus was inflated more and more until he was so divine he could no longer serve the purpose he was created for, to be as a mediator btw God and Man. Hence, there was a corresponding inflation of Mary, who in the Bible is never referred to by Jesus as anything but "You woman!" (Nice guy, eh?) Mary would serve to implore her now-almost entirely divine Son to put in a good word for you with God.

    Eventually she took on more and more of the characteristics of a pagan goddess, becoming Queen of the Heavens or whatnot, and eventually was not only conceived without sin, like Jesus (The Immaculate Conception) but even ascended bodily into Heaven, like Jesus.

    Prots are correct to note that none of this has any Biblical warrant, but it's in the logic of the system.

  29. @Buzz Mohawk
    @anon


    Many prefer their father to their mother.
     
    My parents would get drunk and then beat the shit out of each other in front of me, as far back as I remember.

    I always sided with my mother. It was instinct.

    They were upper-middle class parents. They just had a problem whereby they would sometimes drink too much and then make bloody scenes in front of me when I was a child.

    I always sided with my mother. It was instinct.

    As an adult, years later, I figured it out and realized they both were guilty, both instigating and drawing blood in front of me.

    I always sided with my mother. It was instinct.

    My father was a better person, solid, providing everything, doing everything he could for us. My mother began drunkenly turning on me and abusing me when I was nine or ten. My father never did that.

    I always sided with my mother. It was instinct.

    My father was there throughout my life when I needed him. My mother was insane before I reached adulthood and was no use at all. Even in the years before that, she was undependable when I needed her as a young child.

    Nevertheless, before I lived awhile as a man and finally figured out what had been going on, I always sided with my mother. It was instinct. I wanted to protect her from my father. I even tried when they were fighting and I was very young. My mother did her best to turn me against my own father.

    A boy instinctively wants to protect his mother. At least that is my experience. I believe that is part of being male. I lived it, even though in retrospect I realize my own mother did not deserve it.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Twinkie

    In my childhood memory, my father was a violent, temperamental alcoholic and my mother was a suffering saint. But then I began to appreciate aspects of my father (or at least the memory of them) much more once I too became a father.

    And some years after my father passed away, I realized that my mother was more passive-aggressive, petty, and annoying than I remembered from my childhood. My wife quipped, “Maybe your mom was so great in your youth, because your dad kept some of her negative impulses in check while he was alive.” She might be right.

    I still think more fondly of my mother than my departed father, but I empathize with and appreciate him more than I did before. My youthful harsh judgment of him is tempered now by the experiences of my own fatherhood and the sacrifices I made for my wife and children.

    Today I can say, without hesitation, that I forgive and love him. I just wish I had a chance to reconcile with him before he died. I hope, one day, God will grant me that opportunity.

    • Thanks: RadicalCenter
    • Replies: @R.G. Camara
    @Twinkie

    If you read the Prince the Tides by Pat Conroy, the protagonist is a middle-aged man reflecting on his childhood and young adulthood. In the novel, when he was young, the protagonist thought his abusive, drunk, crazy father was the cause of all his family's problems, but by the end, with maturity, he realizes his two-faced, evil, slutty, manipulative, social-climbing mother was really what hurt them all, and his father was just reacting to it.

    Great book. Actually a sequel (of sorts) to The Great Santini, which was written when Conroy was younger and blamed everything on his father. The Prince of Tides was, obviously, his later realization that he was wrong and his half-apology to his father.

    As many an "abusive" man has pointed out (to no one listening to him), many "abused" wives and girlfriends goad, manipulate, and psychologically attack their man until, in frustration, he snaps and begins hitting them, wherein they play the victim.

    Replies: @Twinkie

    , @ScarletNumber
    @Twinkie


    My wife quipped, “Maybe your mom was so great in your youth, because your dad kept some of her negative impulses in check while he was alive.” She might be right.
     
    Your wife is wise. I'm sure your mother was worse than you remember, but once your dad died I guarantee she got worse. Did your mother work? Mine didn't, so she never knew what it meant to answer to a boss, but at least she had to answer to my dad when he was alive. Now that he isn't, she has no curb on her natural tendencies, so she is unpleasant to be around, not that she was all that great to start with. My parents got married during a time when that's what people did; I don't think they ever even liked each other, never mind love each other.

    Replies: @Twinkie

  30. @Dutch Boy
    Women can be unpleasant but they don't try the intimidation/power trips you get from some men. I suspect that its a good part of the reason men are biased in favor of women (sex being the other).

    Replies: @al gore rhythms

    Women in the workplace can use the ‘that’s racist/sexist/transphobic’ route to intimidate colleagues. But they cannot use personal intimidation which relies on physical presence.

    This is why PC office politics is popular with weak would-be bullies of either sex.

  31. Alice Eagley was on my master’s committee at Purdue, in the early-1980s. If I am recalling correctly, forty years and three days after I was granted my M.S. degree in Personality & Social Psychology, however, it was just a pro-forma appointment, after my major professor and two other members of my thesis committee all had bugged out from West Lafayette, in the late spring of 1981. I already was planning, by then, to leave at the end of the summer and take a year off before heading to law school. I only returned, the next summer, because my major professor had arranged for me to take two more classes at Purdue and be given a non-thesis master’s degree, before starting law school. I passed up the accelerated law-school program at the University of Texas, on a few days’ notice, in order to earn the M.S. Anyway, my recollection of Dr. Eagley was that she was a nice, competent, middle-aged professional; but, her research interests really had nothing to do with my interests (e.g., political psychology), as far as I can recall, through the mists of time.

    • Replies: @D. K.
    @D. K.

    Errata: After forty years, I did not even remember how to spell her name! Mea culpa, Alice!!

  32. @D. K.
    Alice Eagley was on my master's committee at Purdue, in the early-1980s. If I am recalling correctly, forty years and three days after I was granted my M.S. degree in Personality & Social Psychology, however, it was just a pro-forma appointment, after my major professor and two other members of my thesis committee all had bugged out from West Lafayette, in the late spring of 1981. I already was planning, by then, to leave at the end of the summer and take a year off before heading to law school. I only returned, the next summer, because my major professor had arranged for me to take two more classes at Purdue and be given a non-thesis master's degree, before starting law school. I passed up the accelerated law-school program at the University of Texas, on a few days' notice, in order to earn the M.S. Anyway, my recollection of Dr. Eagley was that she was a nice, competent, middle-aged professional; but, her research interests really had nothing to do with my interests (e.g., political psychology), as far as I can recall, through the mists of time.

    Replies: @D. K.

    Errata: After forty years, I did not even remember how to spell her name! Mea culpa, Alice!!

  33. I notice the studies cited date from the late 1980’s to early 2000’s. A lot has changed since then, thanks to smartphones and social media especially. In brief, women have gotten on other people’s nerves a lot, including other women. The Women-Are-Wonderful effect has likely lessened in the era of the Karen.

  34. @Twinkie
    @Buzz Mohawk

    In my childhood memory, my father was a violent, temperamental alcoholic and my mother was a suffering saint. But then I began to appreciate aspects of my father (or at least the memory of them) much more once I too became a father.

    And some years after my father passed away, I realized that my mother was more passive-aggressive, petty, and annoying than I remembered from my childhood. My wife quipped, “Maybe your mom was so great in your youth, because your dad kept some of her negative impulses in check while he was alive.” She might be right.

    I still think more fondly of my mother than my departed father, but I empathize with and appreciate him more than I did before. My youthful harsh judgment of him is tempered now by the experiences of my own fatherhood and the sacrifices I made for my wife and children.

    Today I can say, without hesitation, that I forgive and love him. I just wish I had a chance to reconcile with him before he died. I hope, one day, God will grant me that opportunity.

    Replies: @R.G. Camara, @ScarletNumber

    If you read the Prince the Tides by Pat Conroy, the protagonist is a middle-aged man reflecting on his childhood and young adulthood. In the novel, when he was young, the protagonist thought his abusive, drunk, crazy father was the cause of all his family’s problems, but by the end, with maturity, he realizes his two-faced, evil, slutty, manipulative, social-climbing mother was really what hurt them all, and his father was just reacting to it.

    Great book. Actually a sequel (of sorts) to The Great Santini, which was written when Conroy was younger and blamed everything on his father. The Prince of Tides was, obviously, his later realization that he was wrong and his half-apology to his father.

    As many an “abusive” man has pointed out (to no one listening to him), many “abused” wives and girlfriends goad, manipulate, and psychologically attack their man until, in frustration, he snaps and begins hitting them, wherein they play the victim.

    • Agree: AndrewR
    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @R.G. Camara


    he realizes his two-faced, evil, slutty, manipulative, social-climbing mother was really what hurt them all, and his father was just reacting to it.
     
    That isn't all that realistic either. Marital problems are usually the makings of two people though, yes, there is frequently an imbalance in the suffering (often women in the old days since women are physically weaker).

    That said, this:

    https://youtu.be/rksKvZoUCPQ

    Replies: @Wade Hampton

  35. Anonymous[117] • Disclaimer says:

    Meanwhile, woman who makes her living advising people on ‘diversity’ upset that ‘diversity’ training might be scrapped in British government departments.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/aug/05/suella-bravermans-woke-hr-attorney-general-whitehall-diversity-training

  36. @J1234

    men lack a mechanism that bolsters automatic preference for their own gender.
     
    William Jennings Bryan wasn't a progressive by today's standards, but he was very important in the history of the progressive movement, and was enthusiastic about giving women the vote in the very early 20th century. This wasn't because he saw them as victims who had been deprived of the vote, but because he saw them as superior moral beings, i.e., generally more dedicated to living a Christian life than men of that era were. (Men drank whiskey with their male friends.) He predicted a gigantic wave of Christian motivated voting once women were allowed to go to the polls in all the states. After the temperance movement, however, it didn't really turn out that way, not in the long run.

    Of course, what women actually were (and still are) was much more acquiescent to the prevailing moral powers that be...Christian or otherwise. Women want to be liked more than men do, and - surprise surprise - people who want to be liked are generally more likeable than those who don't. Bryan bought into the mythology of the female, and I'm sure their agreeableness and more gentle disposition helped fool him.

    Replies: @nokangaroos

    Konrad Lorenz called it “the mousegreying of the male”, arguing that in
    modern – post-neolithic – society male “display”, self-assertion and
    self-actualization must be suppressed in the interest of social peace
    (leaving the necessary task of attracting wimmin to “conspicuous consumption”
    read: bling).
    It follows effortlessly that civilization breaks down as soon as women are “equal”.

    • Thanks: J1234
    • Replies: @The Germ Theory of Disease
    @nokangaroos

    "(leaving the necessary task of attracting wimmin to “conspicuous consumption”
    read: bling)."

    The thing that all young men need to be taught is: women can be attracted by money or power, by looks or charisma, or by bling, but in my experience, the thing that attracts women far more effectively, by an order of magnitude, is: prowess. Observable, detectable expertise.

    Get good at something. Better still, become an expert at something. And the "something" must have two qualities (at least as far as attracting women is concerned):

    a) There must be opportunities for public display of prowess, and
    b) There has to be a risk factor involved: the possibility of success or failure, winning or losing.

    Prowess is not demonstrated at a poetry reading, because nothing can notionally go wrong, you can't actually "fail" so neither have you triumphed. If you get laid after a poetry reading, it was because of charisma and/or looks, not prowess.

    Prowess is why rock stars and athletes get laid. There is public risk on the line, and they triumph over it.

    When I was a young man, I was average-looking, always badly dressed, and dead broke, but I was blessed with a certain type of expertise which I had cultivated since childhood.

    Guess what? Beautiful rich chicks didn't mind picking up the check at dinner. Or paying for the hotel room.

    Get good at something, young man.

    Replies: @Intelligent Dasein, @nebulafox, @kaganovitch, @Twinkie, @Anon

  37. It’s testament to the complete mind control and subjugation of the population that people who I hold near and dear ask me “Did you see the women’s …(cricket, league, soccer etc) on the weekend?”

    It’s unbelievable to me that colleagues at work will insert women’s sport into our coffee convos as if women were worthy of any miniscule of contemplation outside of being fucked.

    It’s only through a constant and overwhelming tide of propaganda that women can even be considered worthy of attention, outside child bearing qualities.

    “By contrast, there is no difficulty at all in saying what the evidence is, and always was, for the other theory, the theory of the inferior intellectual capacity of women. This evidence is not at all esoteric, but on the contrary is of the most familiar and homely kind. The main reason why I believe, and the main reason why nearly everyone always has believed, that the intellectual capacity of women is inferior to that of men, is just this: that the intellectual performance of women is inferior to that of men.”

    https://www.wmbriggs.com/post/17124/

    David Stove died some 28 years ago and still we’re left waiting for the overwhelming tide of inventions once the tsunami tidal wave of women unleashed had at least several generations to unleash itself.

    Instead we’ve seen nothing more than constant streams of invective against men, bikini photos of inordinately huge grotesque arses fused to stick legs, plasticine faces with abused lips, demented faces, a repugnant passing roadshow of deformity along with the usual women starving themselves to death or chopping off their tits or going mentally insane, publicly, unrestrained all the while celebrated by media as heroic, stunning and brave.

    Where’s the wymin’s Eddie Van Halen?

    • LOL: AndrewR
  38. @Anon
    Rediscovered by Ann Althouse, who frequently posts on it. From 2005:

    I've said it before, and I must repeat, the rule is: If you do scientific research into the differences between men and women, you must portray whatever you find to be true of women as superior. And when you read reports about scientific research into the differences between men and women, use the hypothesis that the scientists are following that rule. It makes reading the reports quite humorous.

    https://althouse.blogspot.com/2005/11/scientists-remember-to-portray.html
     
    From a 2020 study:

    More precisely, the aim is to evaluate two main hypotheses: (1) The Gender Tribalism Hypothesis: Men will be more positive toward male-favouring findings, women toward female-favouring findings. (2) The Althouse Rule Hypothesis: Both sexes will tend to be more positive toward female-favouring findings. (This is based on the law professor Ann Althouse’s suggestion that, in the modern Western world, it is socially acceptable to talk about female-favouring sex differences but not male-favouring differences.

    :
    :

    The law professor Ann Althouse (2005) alluded to this asymmetry when she observed that, if you want to do research on sex differences and avoid censure, you have to interpret any findings in such a way as to show that women are superior.

    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/334751470_Reactions_to_Male-Favouring_vs_Female-Favouring_Sex_Differences_A_Preregistered_Experiment_and_Southeast_Asian_Replication
     

    Replies: @Rob McX, @Hypnotoad666

    In Western society, people think women are more moral. (Because our morality comes from mothers, and is based on ideals of empathy, self-sacrifice, etc.). But people think that men are more effective. (Because, mostly, they are.).

  39. Vive la difference…it’s all good.

  40. You think women are so great, go work for one. Even they don’t like working for them.

    • Replies: @Known Fact
    @Jim Richard

    Female-driven workplaces seem to swing wildly between two extremes: 1) dysfunctional bipolar personal drama or 2) soul-grinding bureaucracy, emphasizing step-by-step memos, rules and procedures. When consulting I'd see staffs that were demoralized by 1 or hamstrung by 2. Oh, have I mentioned 50 times here that females taking over journalism is not a good thing?

    I'm sure there are horrible tyrannical Type A male bosses who make you work 120 hours a week, but every guy I ever worked for was calm, measured and reasonable.

  41. @Anonymous
    All this does not accord with the ancient time honored perceptions of earlier times, or indeed attitudes still existing in the non western world; namely that women are, in general, envious, spiteful, deceitful, cunning, manipulative, 'bitchy' etc.
    A real dulling of perceptions and the separation of truth from lies and nonsense has occurred in the western world in the past century, which doesn't say much for the future of the west, or the native abilities of the inhabitants of the west. Hence, why the west is and will remain such easy meat for the aggressive dark complected conquerors it is currently so eagerly inviting in.

    The best judge of any woman is another woman. If you really want to see what the female sex is all about, just observe how they interact with each other when in direct competition against each other for some desired result/outcome/male etc.

    Replies: @Redneck farmer

    “A misogynist is a man who hates women as much as women hate other women”.

    • Agree: ScarletNumber
  42. @prosa123
    Hardbodied woman hoists 250-pound sandbag to her shoulder. How many "Men" of Unz could do that?
    https://www.youtube.com/shorts/M0i9W_kFomo

    Replies: @Jim Bob Lassiter, @The Wild Geese Howard, @anon

    I bet she’s got a cootchie that could . . .

  43. @Buzz Mohawk
    It starts out this way: When you are a boy, Girls are Great. Then when you are a man, Women are Wonderful. It's alliterative, you see.

    Truly, I agree with this part:

    Another experiment in the study found adults’ attitudes were measured based on their reactions to categories associated with sexual relations. It revealed that among men who engaged more in sexual activity, the more positive their attitude towards sex, the larger their bias towards women. A greater interest in and liking of sex may promote automatic preference for the out-group of women among men, although both women and men with sexual experience expressed greater liking for the opposite gender.
     
    And Steve's reaction:

    It’s almost as if fraternizing with the enemy saps morale in the War of the Sexes.
     
    Yes, and, BTW, what war? Who really wants one, and who actually has tried to start one?

    Replies: @Unintended Consequence, @SFG

    Lesbians and to a much lesser extent gay men, I think. Damage enough young men’s self confidence and it opens up more opportunities for them. That’s kind of the idea behind a lot of feminism, especially the radfem kind, if you read between the lines.

  44. @AnotherDad
    Glad these folks did this study. Pretty much everyone--everyone sentient--is aware of this reality--despite all the feminist lying--but I had not realized someone had nailed down a decent study.

    These results are all per spec:
    -- everyone has a mother
    -- women are more nurturing
    -- women are superficially nicer--more eager to please
    -- every guy wants ... uh "sexual congress"
    -- men are fairer, more objective
    -- men are in direct sexual competition--occasionally even violent competition--in a way that women simply are not
    -- men and women who experiencing normal male-female complementarity, like it and will correspondingly have more positive attitudes toward the other sex; (Reading the early paragraphs I was thinking "i'd bet the results are better for people who are married or otherwise having sex regularly ... sure 'nough.)


    The one thing I wonder is if the male results toward women will stay as neutral. There is a much more obvious "men suck" vibe out there now from the feminists. (While, of course, still expecting the manana to rain down from heaven.) Furthermore, the behavior of young women just seems crappier, more self-involved, less appealing. My sense--old guy not in the trenches--is that young men have picked up on both these things and have a lower opinion of young women then we did back in the day.

    Replies: @SFG

    I’ve had people tell me that here, and it seems a subtext with a lot of the newer alt right stuff, but I haven’t seen a lot of hard evidence. That tends to be hard to find with incipient cultural shifts, though.

  45. Well I still like girls. Perhaps more in theory than in practice of late, in my dotage, but they are cute and cuddly and if you treat ‘em right they’ll treat you right, unless you pick a psychotic one, or send one moronic sexist generalization too many in their direction.

  46. @Buzz Mohawk
    The mysterious, three-way interface between the internets, Ron Unz's software and my age-ing MacBook Air currently prevents me, as usual, from seeing any other comments or replies as yet, but I must add this without waiting:

    Women are indeed Wonderful. This statement of fact is especially relevant here on this HBD blog, with its appropriately ever-present emphasis on the major human races. You see, my experience has been that Women are Wonderful coming from Whatever place they happen to come from.

    What I mean is, women around the world share mostly the same orientations and drives that complement men! They are Women and they are Wonderful!

    (I just had to share that while sharing Mumm Napa champagne tonight with my Wonderful Woman from halfway around the world. In his speech yesterday in Dallas, Texas, prime minister Viktor Orbán of Hungary mentioned that the men in the audience should find Hungarian women and marry them. I agree.)

    Replies: @SFG

    Considering the relative populations of the USA and Hungary, that sounds like an awful deal for the Hungarian guys. But I imagine he was speaking metaphorically. You can imagine red pill American guys turning up in Hungary and realizing they can’t learn Hungarian though. (It’s a language isolate, almost, with Finnish apparently the closest relative.)

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    @SFG

    In his speech in Texas, Orbán also said that Pope Francis told him "Hungarian is the language of heaven, because it takes an eternity to learn it."

  47. @Trelane
    Women are wonderful so long as they're not in a position of authority over men.

    Replies: @Chrisnonymous, @Ian Smith, @ScarletNumber

    I would modify the statement slightly…

    I vacationed on the Japanese coast recently and one of the beachgoers was a young woman with a particularly scrumptious behind and particularly pale, untouched-by-sun skin. Apparently, either she couldn’t reach around, or her suntan lotion assitant didn’t have the guts to rub into her luscious derriere, because after an afternoon on the sand in the sun, all of her was still milky-white except her sumptuous rump, which was was sunburned badly. Clad in a green string bikini, a fit, pale body with a pink bouncing bum. This is one of the most wonderful sights of women I have seen.

    Women are wonderful….

  48. @prosa123
    Hardbodied woman hoists 250-pound sandbag to her shoulder. How many "Men" of Unz could do that?
    https://www.youtube.com/shorts/M0i9W_kFomo

    Replies: @Jim Bob Lassiter, @The Wild Geese Howard, @anon

    Hardbodied woman hoists 250-pound sandbag to her shoulder.

    Because everything shown on TV is true.

    I wonder how complex her PED schedule is.

  49. @SFG
    @Buzz Mohawk

    Considering the relative populations of the USA and Hungary, that sounds like an awful deal for the Hungarian guys. But I imagine he was speaking metaphorically. You can imagine red pill American guys turning up in Hungary and realizing they can’t learn Hungarian though. (It’s a language isolate, almost, with Finnish apparently the closest relative.)

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk

    In his speech in Texas, Orbán also said that Pope Francis told him “Hungarian is the language of heaven, because it takes an eternity to learn it.”

  50. @Rosie
    @Achmed E. Newman


    FIFT!
     
    Men are wonderful when they don’t presume to dictate what it means to act like a woman but recognize women as fully-fledged individual human beings with our own unique collection of interests, values, and traits.

    Seriously, why does anyone think it's OK to do this? Noone is required to like any particular person, and there is nothing wrong with a personal romantic interest in girly girls only. But why the need to constantly attack and demean women who don't conform to that?

    https://i0.wp.com/bbqrevolt.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/meat-grinders.jpg?fit=930%2C620&ssl=1

    I have never known women to act like this. Maybe that contributes to the women are wonderful effect.

    Replies: @HammerJack

    Hey Rosie. What about black-on-white crime

    • Replies: @HammerJack
    @HammerJack

    Sorry Rosie. Yet another site glitch. I actually just wanted to know if you were in the mood for a three-way.

    https://i.ibb.co/KrFS9B4/Screenshot-20220717-212016-Daily-Mail-Online.jpg

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

  51. @HammerJack
    @Rosie

    Hey Rosie. What about black-on-white crime

    Replies: @HammerJack

    Sorry Rosie. Yet another site glitch. I actually just wanted to know if you were in the mood for a three-way.

    • LOL: Kylie, Hangnail Hans
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @HammerJack

    Black and Grey. Make of that what you will.

    Note that the doll has way bigger knockers. I've never cared much for Freud's Œdipal obsessions, but perhaps he has a point in regards to this couple.

    Replies: @Hangnail Hans

  52. Women are wonderful until you need something built or fixed, started or decided. (And the fine work some women do contribute is almost entirely thanks to physical facilities, institutions and conceptual frameworks painstakingly built by men)

  53. @Jim Richard
    You think women are so great, go work for one. Even they don't like working for them.

    Replies: @Known Fact

    Female-driven workplaces seem to swing wildly between two extremes: 1) dysfunctional bipolar personal drama or 2) soul-grinding bureaucracy, emphasizing step-by-step memos, rules and procedures. When consulting I’d see staffs that were demoralized by 1 or hamstrung by 2. Oh, have I mentioned 50 times here that females taking over journalism is not a good thing?

    I’m sure there are horrible tyrannical Type A male bosses who make you work 120 hours a week, but every guy I ever worked for was calm, measured and reasonable.

    • LOL: SOL
  54. @prosa123
    Hardbodied woman hoists 250-pound sandbag to her shoulder. How many "Men" of Unz could do that?
    https://www.youtube.com/shorts/M0i9W_kFomo

    Replies: @Jim Bob Lassiter, @The Wild Geese Howard, @anon

    Just off the top of my head: Dave Pinsen, for one. Now that you’ve lifted her and her sandbag, go White Knight someplace else.

    • Replies: @prosa123
    @anon

    Here's another hot woman at the Cross Fit Games, doing stuff that most "Men" of Unz couldn't dream of.
    Note to "Men" of Unz: you get a good feeling between your legs out of infantilizing women - Oh no, they're too precious to be in the military!! - thinking that they'll drop their panties for you, when it has exactly the opposite effects. Women hate being infantilized, almost as much as they hate you losers.

    https://www.youtube.com/shorts/s_dwO6HL0n0

    Replies: @Curle, @The Wild Geese Howard

  55. @Joe Stalin
    Well, that's certainly different.

    https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical/status/1556028550104367105

    Replies: @Pixo

    I assume Ukraine hasn’t blown up the Crimea bridge for the same reason they haven’t hit Russia proper: the US told them not to if they want to keep the free weapons flowing.

    That barge doesn’t seem like it would do anything to prevent a GPS guided missile.

    If the Ukes really want to escalate, they can target nuclear power plants and oil refineries in Russia. That’s unwise of them of course, but illustrates how both sides have not engaged in any recent major escalations.

  56. @Joe Stalin
    Didn't seem to stop all those awful men in Indiana from voting against keeping abortion legal for all those fertile women in Hoosierville...

    Replies: @Mark G.

    Didn’t seem to stop all those awful men in Indiana from voting against keeping abortion legal for all those fertile women in Hoosierville…

    I’ve lived here in Indiana my whole life, 66 years. Rather than some form of misogyny, that comes from the religiousness of Hoosiers. I once dated someone who had moved here to be a research scientist for a local drug company, Eli Lilly. She complained to me how religious people here are and how there are churches all over the place. Since I had spent my whole life here, I was barely aware of that in the same way a fish doesn’t notice the water. If I was living somewhere where there were no churches, and everyone was an atheist, it would even feel a little weird to me.

  57. @R.G. Camara
    @Twinkie

    If you read the Prince the Tides by Pat Conroy, the protagonist is a middle-aged man reflecting on his childhood and young adulthood. In the novel, when he was young, the protagonist thought his abusive, drunk, crazy father was the cause of all his family's problems, but by the end, with maturity, he realizes his two-faced, evil, slutty, manipulative, social-climbing mother was really what hurt them all, and his father was just reacting to it.

    Great book. Actually a sequel (of sorts) to The Great Santini, which was written when Conroy was younger and blamed everything on his father. The Prince of Tides was, obviously, his later realization that he was wrong and his half-apology to his father.

    As many an "abusive" man has pointed out (to no one listening to him), many "abused" wives and girlfriends goad, manipulate, and psychologically attack their man until, in frustration, he snaps and begins hitting them, wherein they play the victim.

    Replies: @Twinkie

    he realizes his two-faced, evil, slutty, manipulative, social-climbing mother was really what hurt them all, and his father was just reacting to it.

    That isn’t all that realistic either. Marital problems are usually the makings of two people though, yes, there is frequently an imbalance in the suffering (often women in the old days since women are physically weaker).

    That said, this:

    • Replies: @Wade Hampton
    @Twinkie

    My father was the smartest, most modest, kindest, best beloved person on the planet. My mother loved him and there was never, never any violence in my home.

    One line of his that I remember was something along the lines of "never hit a woman, unless she hits you first."

    Replies: @HammerJack

  58. @Intelligent Dasein
    I'm sorry, was there a point somewhere in all of this?

    Replies: @HammerJack, @Twinkie

    I’m sorry, was there a point somewhere in all of this?

    You’ll see a point if and when you have a wife and daughters.

    • Thanks: Johann Ricke
  59. OK, here’s one datum, namely me. I think women in general are visually more attractive, good looking, beautiful than men. Now why and what causes me to think this – I don’t have a clue. I have never seen a man that I would call beautiful. And I will boldly say that I think my viewpoint is objectively true. So go ahead and laugh – I’m not a “scientist.”

    • Replies: @nokangaroos
    @Malcolm Y


    "To call the long-haired, broad-hipped and narrow-shouldered sex the beautiful one could only occur to the sex drive-addled intellect of man."
    - Schopenhauer
     
  60. @anon
    @prosa123

    Just off the top of my head: Dave Pinsen, for one. Now that you've lifted her and her sandbag, go White Knight someplace else.

    Replies: @prosa123

    Here’s another hot woman at the Cross Fit Games, doing stuff that most “Men” of Unz couldn’t dream of.
    Note to “Men” of Unz: you get a good feeling between your legs out of infantilizing women – Oh no, they’re too precious to be in the military!! – thinking that they’ll drop their panties for you, when it has exactly the opposite effects. Women hate being infantilized, almost as much as they hate you losers.

    https://www.youtube.com/shorts/s_dwO6HL0n0

    • Replies: @Curle
    @prosa123

    Because looking at society through the lens of extreme outliers is the best way to convey a sense of reality? Your imbecile act is growing old.

    Replies: @Unintended Consequence, @prosa123

    , @The Wild Geese Howard
    @prosa123


    Here’s another hot woman at the Cross Fit Games, doing stuff that most “Men” of Unz couldn’t dream of.
     
    Another social commentator I occasionally browse recently asked his male audience how they felt about dating muscular women.

    Overwhelmingly, they felt that those ladies gave off too much masculine energy.

    Anyway, I hope Ms. Adams isn't on track to become the next Andreas Krieger.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andreas_Krieger
  61. …women’s in-group biases were 4.5 times stronger than those of men.

    Makes sense.

    Perhaps psychological sense, but not arithmetical. Does “4.5 times stronger” equal “4.5 times as strong” or “5.5 times as strong”? Logically, it should be the latter. Try the same sentence again with, say, “50%”.

    than in society’s where…

    Is the ether still in effect, Steve?

    I’m assuming Sweden as an example of what they mean by egalitarian…

    Sweden and Norway are the only two countries that draft, or have ever drafted, both sexes on an equal basis. (Surprise: the draft is active in Scandinavia! Holy 1973, Batman!)

    I’d give the top spot on this to Norway.

    •They did it first.

    •They did it immediately, while Sweden went via the backdoor, suspending conscription with the proviso that should it return, it would apply to both sexes. (The break lasted a mere eight years, till the Russians appeared to get ever more truculent.)

    •They did it at the urging of the women’s movement itself, something utterly inconceivable in the Anglosphere. Or even Sweden.

    Get this:

    5 out of 8 Parties in Norway are Led by Women Now

  62. @HammerJack
    @HammerJack

    Sorry Rosie. Yet another site glitch. I actually just wanted to know if you were in the mood for a three-way.

    https://i.ibb.co/KrFS9B4/Screenshot-20220717-212016-Daily-Mail-Online.jpg

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Black and Grey. Make of that what you will.

    Note that the doll has way bigger knockers. I’ve never cared much for Freud’s Œdipal obsessions, but perhaps he has a point in regards to this couple.

    • Replies: @Hangnail Hans
    @Reg Cæsar

    They don't look at all alike! The inflatable one doesn't have RBF for one thing.

    Wonder whose idea it was to say that they look EXACTLY ALIKE? You get three guesses.

  63. When men treat women in the same fashion that men treat other men, women take it personally and feel that they are being discriminated against. When they say “equality” they mean retaining their privileges and removing yours. And if you let them, you probably deserve it.

  64. @nokangaroos
    @J1234

    Konrad Lorenz called it "the mousegreying of the male", arguing that in
    modern - post-neolithic - society male "display", self-assertion and
    self-actualization must be suppressed in the interest of social peace
    (leaving the necessary task of attracting wimmin to "conspicuous consumption"
    read: bling).
    It follows effortlessly that civilization breaks down as soon as women are "equal".

    Replies: @The Germ Theory of Disease

    “(leaving the necessary task of attracting wimmin to “conspicuous consumption”
    read: bling).”

    The thing that all young men need to be taught is: women can be attracted by money or power, by looks or charisma, or by bling, but in my experience, the thing that attracts women far more effectively, by an order of magnitude, is: prowess. Observable, detectable expertise.

    Get good at something. Better still, become an expert at something. And the “something” must have two qualities (at least as far as attracting women is concerned):

    a) There must be opportunities for public display of prowess, and
    b) There has to be a risk factor involved: the possibility of success or failure, winning or losing.

    Prowess is not demonstrated at a poetry reading, because nothing can notionally go wrong, you can’t actually “fail” so neither have you triumphed. If you get laid after a poetry reading, it was because of charisma and/or looks, not prowess.

    Prowess is why rock stars and athletes get laid. There is public risk on the line, and they triumph over it.

    When I was a young man, I was average-looking, always badly dressed, and dead broke, but I was blessed with a certain type of expertise which I had cultivated since childhood.

    Guess what? Beautiful rich chicks didn’t mind picking up the check at dinner. Or paying for the hotel room.

    Get good at something, young man.

    • Replies: @Intelligent Dasein
    @The Germ Theory of Disease


    Prowess is not demonstrated at a poetry reading, because nothing can notionally go wrong, you can’t actually “fail” so neither have you triumphed. If you get laid after a poetry reading, it was because of charisma and/or looks, not prowess.

    Prowess is why rock stars and athletes get laid. There is public risk on the line, and they triumph over it.
     
    I have to object at this point. There is no essential difference between performing at a poetry reading and performing at a rock concert. A rock concert is just a poetry reading backed by drums and guitars. Similarly, you definitely have to have "prowess" with the spoken word in order to read poetry convincingly in public. Some people are quite mesmerizing at this, and the rest of us "fail" at it.

    Replies: @The Germ Theory of Disease

    , @nebulafox
    @The Germ Theory of Disease

    >I was blessed with a certain type of expertise which I had cultivated since childhood.

    ?

    , @kaganovitch
    @The Germ Theory of Disease

    When I was a young man, I was average-looking, always badly dressed, and dead broke, but I was blessed with a certain type of expertise which I had cultivated since childhood.

    Pickpocket?

    , @Twinkie
    @The Germ Theory of Disease


    Get good at something, young man.
     
    Excellent advice, but...

    a) There must be opportunities for public display of prowess, and
    b) There has to be a risk factor involved: the possibility of success or failure, winning or losing.
     
    This is not necessarily true. Yes, there are many women who are attracted to men who are daring and courageous. But there are other women who are drawn to men who are artistically (drawing, painting, music, etc.) or verbally (poetry, telling jokes, etc.) polished and skillful.

    Your last sentence is right on the money. When men, especially young men, are accomplished and excel at things (obvious endeavors such as athletics, academics, the arts, or moneymaking, but also somethings as silly as, say, magic tricks or juggling), it sends a message to women that the men in question are capable of dedication and drive to achieve something unusual, characteristics that distinguish them from "ordinary" people and make them stand out. This is appealing to women.

    Now, the specifics of those "achievements" will dictate the types of women who are thusly attracted. My wife was attracted to me for my intelligence, gallantry, athletic prowess, sense of humor, and, most of all, my general traditional/gentlemanly masculinity. Of course, she herself was also a standout athlete who came from a very traditional family and appreciated those qualities. Before her I dated other young women, some of who told my friends that they quickly lost interest in me, because I was "too square" or "too straight arrow" or just plain "too conservative." Those women were clearly not my crowd - most of them ended up dating the kind of guys who played guitar in a band or were artsy (though I think many, perhaps most, of them, judging from the class news section of the alumni magazine, eventually went on to marry lawyers, doctors, investment bankers, IT executives, and so on).

    When I was a young man, I found that, despite my initial inexperience and naivete, it was actually pretty easy to gain the initial interest of women. The first year in college, as a challenge to myself, I proceeded to memorize the names and home cities of almost every freshman co-ed in the directory. Occasionally at parties, when I found a girl attractive, I'd approach her, introduce myself, get her name and then say, "Hey, you're from so-and-so town, aren't you?" A lot of girls would be surprised and intrigued by this stupid trick (of course, I tried to be mysterious about it whenever they were puzzled and asked, "How did you know?" and sometimes would attribute it to accents or mannerisms and such, which occasionally backfired when the girl in question turned out to have grown up elsewhere and only lived in her "hometown" for a year or two).

    So, yeah, at least in the short term, be unusual, stand out, and be good at something. To sustain the interest though and form a more lasting relationship, you have to be something else and more, but that's another topic for another day.
    , @Anon
    @The Germ Theory of Disease


    When I was a young man, I was average-looking, always badly dressed, and dead broke, but I was blessed with a certain type of expertise which I had cultivated since childhood.
     
    What expertise was it in?
  65. @Trelane
    Women are wonderful so long as they're not in a position of authority over men.

    Replies: @Chrisnonymous, @Ian Smith, @ScarletNumber

    Strongly disavow!

  66. @prosa123
    @anon

    Here's another hot woman at the Cross Fit Games, doing stuff that most "Men" of Unz couldn't dream of.
    Note to "Men" of Unz: you get a good feeling between your legs out of infantilizing women - Oh no, they're too precious to be in the military!! - thinking that they'll drop their panties for you, when it has exactly the opposite effects. Women hate being infantilized, almost as much as they hate you losers.

    https://www.youtube.com/shorts/s_dwO6HL0n0

    Replies: @Curle, @The Wild Geese Howard

    Because looking at society through the lens of extreme outliers is the best way to convey a sense of reality? Your imbecile act is growing old.

    • Agree: northeast
    • LOL: ScarletNumber
    • Replies: @Unintended Consequence
    @Curle

    I get the sense you're an outlier on the far left of the curve more often than the right, Curle.

    Replies: @Curle

    , @prosa123
    @Curle

    You see, you "Men" of Unz assume that women are too frail and weak to be in the military, and therefore men have to do all the fighting and dying, when the CrossFit Games plainly show that women are capable of way more than you'd ever imagine. Very few if any of these ultra-strong women are genetic freaks. They're just normal women who train very hard. Certainly more that a typical woman would need to train to be able to fight in combat.

    And by the way, the CrossFit Games test for steroids.

    Replies: @Intelligent Dasein, @Curle, @anonymous

  67. @Curle
    @prosa123

    Because looking at society through the lens of extreme outliers is the best way to convey a sense of reality? Your imbecile act is growing old.

    Replies: @Unintended Consequence, @prosa123

    I get the sense you’re an outlier on the far left of the curve more often than the right, Curle.

    • Replies: @Curle
    @Unintended Consequence

    Get all the ‘senses’ you want.

  68. @Curle
    @prosa123

    Because looking at society through the lens of extreme outliers is the best way to convey a sense of reality? Your imbecile act is growing old.

    Replies: @Unintended Consequence, @prosa123

    You see, you “Men” of Unz assume that women are too frail and weak to be in the military, and therefore men have to do all the fighting and dying, when the CrossFit Games plainly show that women are capable of way more than you’d ever imagine. Very few if any of these ultra-strong women are genetic freaks. They’re just normal women who train very hard. Certainly more that a typical woman would need to train to be able to fight in combat.

    And by the way, the CrossFit Games test for steroids.

    • LOL: Wade Hampton, Curle
    • Replies: @Intelligent Dasein
    @prosa123

    I don't think that most men who disagree with women being in the military believe that women are "too frail and weak" to do the job. It takes a strong person to run a household and raise a brood of children, which is exactly what women have done from time immemorial, and mostly without indoor plumbing, power tools, and electric appliances.

    The reason that women should not be in the military is that it reverses and confuses the whole reason for having a military in the first place. The purpose of the military is to fight wars; the purpose of fighting wars is to protect hearth and home. Women are part of the "hearth and home" you're supposed to protect. This is what you fight for, not what you fight with.

    Any nation that has to put its women into combat has either literally come down to its last ditch, or it simply does not care about its own people and is fighting solely for the enrichment of its oligarchic class.

    Replies: @prosa123

    , @Curle
    @prosa123

    https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/women-in-combat-lets-get-real/article7879189/


    “The Army’s physical fitness test in basic training is a three-event physical performance test used to assess endurance. The minimum requirement for 17- to 21-year-old males is 35 pushups, 47 situps and a two-mile run in 16 minutes, 36 seconds or less. For females of the same age, the minimum requirement is 13 pushups, 47 situps and a 19:42 two-mile run. Why the difference in fitness requirements? “USMC Women in the Service Restrictions Review” found that women, on average, have 20 percent lower aerobic power, 40 percent lower muscle strength, 47 percent less lifting strength and 26 percent slower marching speed than men.”

    https://www.theintell.com/story/opinion/2013/02/04/women-in-combat-they-re/17266658007/

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Hibernian

    , @anonymous
    @prosa123

    If a society is going to favor women over men, as ours does, then we need more women dying at the front lines of battle. Seems fair: those that are given more, should be prepared to sacrifice more for the society that favors them. I'm all for women getting gunned down in combat. The more the merrier.

    Replies: @nokangaroos

  69. @prosa123
    @Curle

    You see, you "Men" of Unz assume that women are too frail and weak to be in the military, and therefore men have to do all the fighting and dying, when the CrossFit Games plainly show that women are capable of way more than you'd ever imagine. Very few if any of these ultra-strong women are genetic freaks. They're just normal women who train very hard. Certainly more that a typical woman would need to train to be able to fight in combat.

    And by the way, the CrossFit Games test for steroids.

    Replies: @Intelligent Dasein, @Curle, @anonymous

    I don’t think that most men who disagree with women being in the military believe that women are “too frail and weak” to do the job. It takes a strong person to run a household and raise a brood of children, which is exactly what women have done from time immemorial, and mostly without indoor plumbing, power tools, and electric appliances.

    The reason that women should not be in the military is that it reverses and confuses the whole reason for having a military in the first place. The purpose of the military is to fight wars; the purpose of fighting wars is to protect hearth and home. Women are part of the “hearth and home” you’re supposed to protect. This is what you fight for, not what you fight with.

    Any nation that has to put its women into combat has either literally come down to its last ditch, or it simply does not care about its own people and is fighting solely for the enrichment of its oligarchic class.

    • Replies: @prosa123
    @Intelligent Dasein

    You are a disgrace to all men. All people, actually. In fact this whole site is a disgrace, everyone babbling about immigrants and "Negroes" and "trannies." What a bunch of losers.

    Replies: @Hangnail Hans

  70. @Twinkie
    @R.G. Camara


    he realizes his two-faced, evil, slutty, manipulative, social-climbing mother was really what hurt them all, and his father was just reacting to it.
     
    That isn't all that realistic either. Marital problems are usually the makings of two people though, yes, there is frequently an imbalance in the suffering (often women in the old days since women are physically weaker).

    That said, this:

    https://youtu.be/rksKvZoUCPQ

    Replies: @Wade Hampton

    My father was the smartest, most modest, kindest, best beloved person on the planet. My mother loved him and there was never, never any violence in my home.

    One line of his that I remember was something along the lines of “never hit a woman, unless she hits you first.”

    • Replies: @HammerJack
    @Wade Hampton

    Hey! I remember your first sentence
    —from The Manchurian Candidate!

  71. @Trelane
    Women are wonderful so long as they're not in a position of authority over men.

    Replies: @Chrisnonymous, @Ian Smith, @ScarletNumber

    Working in education, if you were to ask a woman if she would rather have a man boss or a woman boss, almost all of them would rather have a man boss.

    • Agree: Mark G.
    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @ScarletNumber


    Working in education, if you were to ask a woman if she would rather have a man boss or a woman boss, almost all of them would rather have a man boss.
     
    That's because a male boss is easier on female subordinates (esp. if the latter are attractive or "cutesy") than a woman boss is.

    When my wife took over as the clinical head of a hospital, she got rid of a lot of deadweight female employees (esp. some of the younger ones), who had been coasting on the good graces of the former male boss. Under her leadership, productivity has soared - to borrow a Pentagon phrase from a few years ago, the hospital is doing more with less now. Most of her employees are happier now and the morale is high, because merit/effort is rewarded and hardworking employees are getting salary increases and bonuses, thanks, in part to cutting the deadweight that has generated considerable budgetary flexibility.

    Replies: @Hangnail Hans

  72. This is nothing new. The following nursery rhyme was popular 200 years ago:

    What are little boys made of?
    Snips, snails
    And puppy-dogs’ tails

    What are little girls made of?
    Sugar and spice
    And everything nice

  73. @prosa123
    @anon

    Here's another hot woman at the Cross Fit Games, doing stuff that most "Men" of Unz couldn't dream of.
    Note to "Men" of Unz: you get a good feeling between your legs out of infantilizing women - Oh no, they're too precious to be in the military!! - thinking that they'll drop their panties for you, when it has exactly the opposite effects. Women hate being infantilized, almost as much as they hate you losers.

    https://www.youtube.com/shorts/s_dwO6HL0n0

    Replies: @Curle, @The Wild Geese Howard

    Here’s another hot woman at the Cross Fit Games, doing stuff that most “Men” of Unz couldn’t dream of.

    Another social commentator I occasionally browse recently asked his male audience how they felt about dating muscular women.

    Overwhelmingly, they felt that those ladies gave off too much masculine energy.

    Anyway, I hope Ms. Adams isn’t on track to become the next Andreas Krieger.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andreas_Krieger

  74. @Twinkie
    @Buzz Mohawk

    In my childhood memory, my father was a violent, temperamental alcoholic and my mother was a suffering saint. But then I began to appreciate aspects of my father (or at least the memory of them) much more once I too became a father.

    And some years after my father passed away, I realized that my mother was more passive-aggressive, petty, and annoying than I remembered from my childhood. My wife quipped, “Maybe your mom was so great in your youth, because your dad kept some of her negative impulses in check while he was alive.” She might be right.

    I still think more fondly of my mother than my departed father, but I empathize with and appreciate him more than I did before. My youthful harsh judgment of him is tempered now by the experiences of my own fatherhood and the sacrifices I made for my wife and children.

    Today I can say, without hesitation, that I forgive and love him. I just wish I had a chance to reconcile with him before he died. I hope, one day, God will grant me that opportunity.

    Replies: @R.G. Camara, @ScarletNumber

    My wife quipped, “Maybe your mom was so great in your youth, because your dad kept some of her negative impulses in check while he was alive.” She might be right.

    Your wife is wise. I’m sure your mother was worse than you remember, but once your dad died I guarantee she got worse. Did your mother work? Mine didn’t, so she never knew what it meant to answer to a boss, but at least she had to answer to my dad when he was alive. Now that he isn’t, she has no curb on her natural tendencies, so she is unpleasant to be around, not that she was all that great to start with. My parents got married during a time when that’s what people did; I don’t think they ever even liked each other, never mind love each other.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @ScarletNumber


    Did your mother work?
     
    Yes, she did. Quite diligently, with the exception of when I was in grade school.

    I’m sure your mother was worse than you remember, but once your dad died I guarantee she got worse.
     
    Yes, on both. To clarify, though, my mother is mostly a wonderful person, very self-sacrificing and devoted. It's just that she isn't the saint I imagined her to be in my youth. Adulthood shatters a lot of childhood illusions. :)

    I don’t think they ever even liked each other, never mind love each other.
     
    My parents fell madly in love with each other, but they were not a good fit temperamentally. They quickly grew to dislike each other in marriage, but they still loved each other. Even though my mother felt tyrannized by my father for much of their marriage, she mourned his passing intensely and declined all efforts of friends and family to set her up with another man. I know she prays for my father's soul every day even now.

    Some days, I don't like some of my kids or even my wife, but always I love them. To me, liking is a mood, but love is something beyond like or dislike. Whether the love takes the form of the paternal, fraternal, filial, romantic, or even Agape, the commonality of all forms of love is sacrifice - giving without expecting reciprocation.

    Replies: @nebulafox

  75. @Anonymous
    @onetwothree

    Crap.

    No Arab etc ever thinks like that.

    Replies: @James J. O'Meara

    In general, or are you referring to the Holy Hierarchy mentioned by Twain?

    In Islam, Jesus is a (mere) prophet, as is Mohammed. But in Christianity, as the name implies, he’s sort of like God. (Hence the ignorant Christian term “Mohammedan” as if Moslems worshipped Mohammed).

    Christians, like Woke Leftists (who derive from them), have no brakes or sense of proportion. As the centuries went by, Rabbi Jesus was inflated more and more until he was so divine he could no longer serve the purpose he was created for, to be as a mediator btw God and Man. Hence, there was a corresponding inflation of Mary, who in the Bible is never referred to by Jesus as anything but “You woman!” (Nice guy, eh?) Mary would serve to implore her now-almost entirely divine Son to put in a good word for you with God.

    Eventually she took on more and more of the characteristics of a pagan goddess, becoming Queen of the Heavens or whatnot, and eventually was not only conceived without sin, like Jesus (The Immaculate Conception) but even ascended bodily into Heaven, like Jesus.

    Prots are correct to note that none of this has any Biblical warrant, but it’s in the logic of the system.

  76. @prosa123
    @Curle

    You see, you "Men" of Unz assume that women are too frail and weak to be in the military, and therefore men have to do all the fighting and dying, when the CrossFit Games plainly show that women are capable of way more than you'd ever imagine. Very few if any of these ultra-strong women are genetic freaks. They're just normal women who train very hard. Certainly more that a typical woman would need to train to be able to fight in combat.

    And by the way, the CrossFit Games test for steroids.

    Replies: @Intelligent Dasein, @Curle, @anonymous

    https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/women-in-combat-lets-get-real/article7879189/

    “The Army’s physical fitness test in basic training is a three-event physical performance test used to assess endurance. The minimum requirement for 17- to 21-year-old males is 35 pushups, 47 situps and a two-mile run in 16 minutes, 36 seconds or less. For females of the same age, the minimum requirement is 13 pushups, 47 situps and a 19:42 two-mile run. Why the difference in fitness requirements? “USMC Women in the Service Restrictions Review” found that women, on average, have 20 percent lower aerobic power, 40 percent lower muscle strength, 47 percent less lifting strength and 26 percent slower marching speed than men.”

    https://www.theintell.com/story/opinion/2013/02/04/women-in-combat-they-re/17266658007/

    • Thanks: SOL
    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @Curle

    Not only are women weaker physically, they cannot load-bear over time without suffering very high rates of injury. Even very muscular women who can "lift" have trouble carrying load and moving (marching, climbing, etc.) for an extended period of time without suffering joint/ligament injuries.

    That's been demonstrated time again in our own military trials as well as those of the Israelis.

    And this doesn't even account for other complications women bring, such as the necessity for "enhanced" hygiene requirements and ob/gyn care and facilities. And let's not forget the sexual complications (which started to become a big morale issue at some of the bases in Saudi Arabia during the First Gulf War, necessitating aggressive JAG action).

    , @Hibernian
    @Curle

    Forty seven situps for both men and women is a result of ideology; they can claim that women meet the same standards in one event. Previously, women had to meet higher standards in this event, because it involves pelvic muscles to a high degree. Which is better, saying women have to meet higher standards in one event to partially make up for their deficiencies in others, or to say "Yipee!" because of equal standards in one event? The powers that be chose the latter. That is to say, they chose irrationality, as they almost always do.

  77. @ScarletNumber
    @Twinkie


    My wife quipped, “Maybe your mom was so great in your youth, because your dad kept some of her negative impulses in check while he was alive.” She might be right.
     
    Your wife is wise. I'm sure your mother was worse than you remember, but once your dad died I guarantee she got worse. Did your mother work? Mine didn't, so she never knew what it meant to answer to a boss, but at least she had to answer to my dad when he was alive. Now that he isn't, she has no curb on her natural tendencies, so she is unpleasant to be around, not that she was all that great to start with. My parents got married during a time when that's what people did; I don't think they ever even liked each other, never mind love each other.

    Replies: @Twinkie

    Did your mother work?

    Yes, she did. Quite diligently, with the exception of when I was in grade school.

    I’m sure your mother was worse than you remember, but once your dad died I guarantee she got worse.

    Yes, on both. To clarify, though, my mother is mostly a wonderful person, very self-sacrificing and devoted. It’s just that she isn’t the saint I imagined her to be in my youth. Adulthood shatters a lot of childhood illusions. 🙂

    I don’t think they ever even liked each other, never mind love each other.

    My parents fell madly in love with each other, but they were not a good fit temperamentally. They quickly grew to dislike each other in marriage, but they still loved each other. Even though my mother felt tyrannized by my father for much of their marriage, she mourned his passing intensely and declined all efforts of friends and family to set her up with another man. I know she prays for my father’s soul every day even now.

    Some days, I don’t like some of my kids or even my wife, but always I love them. To me, liking is a mood, but love is something beyond like or dislike. Whether the love takes the form of the paternal, fraternal, filial, romantic, or even Agape, the commonality of all forms of love is sacrifice – giving without expecting reciprocation.

    • Agree: nebulafox
    • Thanks: Johann Ricke
    • Replies: @nebulafox
    @Twinkie

    >My parents fell madly in love with each other, but they were not a good fit temperamentally. They quickly grew to dislike each other in marriage, but they still loved each other.

    I know that situation. Saying it's not fun is a gross understatement.

    The modern mainstream pushes a lot of bad ideas, but conflating love with the relatively sterile, inoffensive feeling of liking someone as an individual has to rank up there as one of the most potentially destructive. It is also repugnant on a deeper level: cheapens what love actually is. The flip coin emotion of rooted hated has more in common than abstracting liking someone, as if they were a meal.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Anonymous

  78. @Curle
    @prosa123

    https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/women-in-combat-lets-get-real/article7879189/


    “The Army’s physical fitness test in basic training is a three-event physical performance test used to assess endurance. The minimum requirement for 17- to 21-year-old males is 35 pushups, 47 situps and a two-mile run in 16 minutes, 36 seconds or less. For females of the same age, the minimum requirement is 13 pushups, 47 situps and a 19:42 two-mile run. Why the difference in fitness requirements? “USMC Women in the Service Restrictions Review” found that women, on average, have 20 percent lower aerobic power, 40 percent lower muscle strength, 47 percent less lifting strength and 26 percent slower marching speed than men.”

    https://www.theintell.com/story/opinion/2013/02/04/women-in-combat-they-re/17266658007/

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Hibernian

    Not only are women weaker physically, they cannot load-bear over time without suffering very high rates of injury. Even very muscular women who can “lift” have trouble carrying load and moving (marching, climbing, etc.) for an extended period of time without suffering joint/ligament injuries.

    That’s been demonstrated time again in our own military trials as well as those of the Israelis.

    And this doesn’t even account for other complications women bring, such as the necessity for “enhanced” hygiene requirements and ob/gyn care and facilities. And let’s not forget the sexual complications (which started to become a big morale issue at some of the bases in Saudi Arabia during the First Gulf War, necessitating aggressive JAG action).

  79. @ScarletNumber
    @Trelane

    Working in education, if you were to ask a woman if she would rather have a man boss or a woman boss, almost all of them would rather have a man boss.

    Replies: @Twinkie

    Working in education, if you were to ask a woman if she would rather have a man boss or a woman boss, almost all of them would rather have a man boss.

    That’s because a male boss is easier on female subordinates (esp. if the latter are attractive or “cutesy”) than a woman boss is.

    When my wife took over as the clinical head of a hospital, she got rid of a lot of deadweight female employees (esp. some of the younger ones), who had been coasting on the good graces of the former male boss. Under her leadership, productivity has soared – to borrow a Pentagon phrase from a few years ago, the hospital is doing more with less now. Most of her employees are happier now and the morale is high, because merit/effort is rewarded and hardworking employees are getting salary increases and bonuses, thanks, in part to cutting the deadweight that has generated considerable budgetary flexibility.

    • Disagree: ScarletNumber
    • Replies: @Hangnail Hans
    @Twinkie

    Also, a female boss is generally able to discipline (or even fire) deadweight without bringing on civil rights lawsuits.

    Replies: @Twinkie

  80. @Unintended Consequence
    @Curle

    I get the sense you're an outlier on the far left of the curve more often than the right, Curle.

    Replies: @Curle

    Get all the ‘senses’ you want.

  81. @Intelligent Dasein
    @prosa123

    I don't think that most men who disagree with women being in the military believe that women are "too frail and weak" to do the job. It takes a strong person to run a household and raise a brood of children, which is exactly what women have done from time immemorial, and mostly without indoor plumbing, power tools, and electric appliances.

    The reason that women should not be in the military is that it reverses and confuses the whole reason for having a military in the first place. The purpose of the military is to fight wars; the purpose of fighting wars is to protect hearth and home. Women are part of the "hearth and home" you're supposed to protect. This is what you fight for, not what you fight with.

    Any nation that has to put its women into combat has either literally come down to its last ditch, or it simply does not care about its own people and is fighting solely for the enrichment of its oligarchic class.

    Replies: @prosa123

    You are a disgrace to all men. All people, actually. In fact this whole site is a disgrace, everyone babbling about immigrants and “Negroes” and “trannies.” What a bunch of losers.

    • Troll: ScarletNumber
    • Replies: @Hangnail Hans
    @prosa123


    In fact this whole site is a disgrace, everyone babbling about immigrants and “Negroes” and “trannies.” What a bunch of losers.
     
    LOL....yet you just can't get enough, can you.

    Now go back to your TV set, your happy place.

  82. @Reg Cæsar
    @HammerJack

    Black and Grey. Make of that what you will.

    Note that the doll has way bigger knockers. I've never cared much for Freud's Œdipal obsessions, but perhaps he has a point in regards to this couple.

    Replies: @Hangnail Hans

    They don’t look at all alike! The inflatable one doesn’t have RBF for one thing.

    Wonder whose idea it was to say that they look EXACTLY ALIKE? You get three guesses.

  83. @Twinkie
    @ScarletNumber


    Working in education, if you were to ask a woman if she would rather have a man boss or a woman boss, almost all of them would rather have a man boss.
     
    That's because a male boss is easier on female subordinates (esp. if the latter are attractive or "cutesy") than a woman boss is.

    When my wife took over as the clinical head of a hospital, she got rid of a lot of deadweight female employees (esp. some of the younger ones), who had been coasting on the good graces of the former male boss. Under her leadership, productivity has soared - to borrow a Pentagon phrase from a few years ago, the hospital is doing more with less now. Most of her employees are happier now and the morale is high, because merit/effort is rewarded and hardworking employees are getting salary increases and bonuses, thanks, in part to cutting the deadweight that has generated considerable budgetary flexibility.

    Replies: @Hangnail Hans

    Also, a female boss is generally able to discipline (or even fire) deadweight without bringing on civil rights lawsuits.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @Hangnail Hans


    Also, a female boss is generally able to discipline (or even fire) deadweight without bringing on civil rights lawsuits.
     
    In some cases (other females, mostly), yes. But even a woman boss has to be exceedingly careful about firing blacks, women or men, and occasionally Hispanics.
  84. @prosa123
    @Intelligent Dasein

    You are a disgrace to all men. All people, actually. In fact this whole site is a disgrace, everyone babbling about immigrants and "Negroes" and "trannies." What a bunch of losers.

    Replies: @Hangnail Hans

    In fact this whole site is a disgrace, everyone babbling about immigrants and “Negroes” and “trannies.” What a bunch of losers.

    LOL….yet you just can’t get enough, can you.

    Now go back to your TV set, your happy place.

  85. Bro something Harland was the first woman leader not to lead her country into a war.

  86. @Malcolm Y
    OK, here's one datum, namely me. I think women in general are visually more attractive, good looking, beautiful than men. Now why and what causes me to think this - I don't have a clue. I have never seen a man that I would call beautiful. And I will boldly say that I think my viewpoint is objectively true. So go ahead and laugh - I'm not a "scientist."

    Replies: @nokangaroos

    “To call the long-haired, broad-hipped and narrow-shouldered sex the beautiful one could only occur to the sex drive-addled intellect of man.”
    – Schopenhauer

  87. People thought that when women got the vote there wouldn’t be any more wars.

  88. @The Germ Theory of Disease
    @nokangaroos

    "(leaving the necessary task of attracting wimmin to “conspicuous consumption”
    read: bling)."

    The thing that all young men need to be taught is: women can be attracted by money or power, by looks or charisma, or by bling, but in my experience, the thing that attracts women far more effectively, by an order of magnitude, is: prowess. Observable, detectable expertise.

    Get good at something. Better still, become an expert at something. And the "something" must have two qualities (at least as far as attracting women is concerned):

    a) There must be opportunities for public display of prowess, and
    b) There has to be a risk factor involved: the possibility of success or failure, winning or losing.

    Prowess is not demonstrated at a poetry reading, because nothing can notionally go wrong, you can't actually "fail" so neither have you triumphed. If you get laid after a poetry reading, it was because of charisma and/or looks, not prowess.

    Prowess is why rock stars and athletes get laid. There is public risk on the line, and they triumph over it.

    When I was a young man, I was average-looking, always badly dressed, and dead broke, but I was blessed with a certain type of expertise which I had cultivated since childhood.

    Guess what? Beautiful rich chicks didn't mind picking up the check at dinner. Or paying for the hotel room.

    Get good at something, young man.

    Replies: @Intelligent Dasein, @nebulafox, @kaganovitch, @Twinkie, @Anon

    Prowess is not demonstrated at a poetry reading, because nothing can notionally go wrong, you can’t actually “fail” so neither have you triumphed. If you get laid after a poetry reading, it was because of charisma and/or looks, not prowess.

    Prowess is why rock stars and athletes get laid. There is public risk on the line, and they triumph over it.

    I have to object at this point. There is no essential difference between performing at a poetry reading and performing at a rock concert. A rock concert is just a poetry reading backed by drums and guitars. Similarly, you definitely have to have “prowess” with the spoken word in order to read poetry convincingly in public. Some people are quite mesmerizing at this, and the rest of us “fail” at it.

    • LOL: Kylie
    • Replies: @The Germ Theory of Disease
    @Intelligent Dasein

    You should go to more poetry readings and rock concerts, then you'd spot the difference.

    Kidding aside, I take your point, but the larger point is: scale matters. If you're Frank O'Hara or Allen Ginsberg, then your reading comes off well. There aren't a lot of Franks and Allens, and certainly not as many as there are wannabe Eddie van Halens, or even Snoop Doggs.

    nebulafox says "?"

    What's the big deal? You never heard of someone working their ass off in their youth, and then getting rewarded later? It's pretty common, really.

    Replies: @ScarletNumber

  89. @Twinkie
    @ScarletNumber


    Did your mother work?
     
    Yes, she did. Quite diligently, with the exception of when I was in grade school.

    I’m sure your mother was worse than you remember, but once your dad died I guarantee she got worse.
     
    Yes, on both. To clarify, though, my mother is mostly a wonderful person, very self-sacrificing and devoted. It's just that she isn't the saint I imagined her to be in my youth. Adulthood shatters a lot of childhood illusions. :)

    I don’t think they ever even liked each other, never mind love each other.
     
    My parents fell madly in love with each other, but they were not a good fit temperamentally. They quickly grew to dislike each other in marriage, but they still loved each other. Even though my mother felt tyrannized by my father for much of their marriage, she mourned his passing intensely and declined all efforts of friends and family to set her up with another man. I know she prays for my father's soul every day even now.

    Some days, I don't like some of my kids or even my wife, but always I love them. To me, liking is a mood, but love is something beyond like or dislike. Whether the love takes the form of the paternal, fraternal, filial, romantic, or even Agape, the commonality of all forms of love is sacrifice - giving without expecting reciprocation.

    Replies: @nebulafox

    >My parents fell madly in love with each other, but they were not a good fit temperamentally. They quickly grew to dislike each other in marriage, but they still loved each other.

    I know that situation. Saying it’s not fun is a gross understatement.

    The modern mainstream pushes a lot of bad ideas, but conflating love with the relatively sterile, inoffensive feeling of liking someone as an individual has to rank up there as one of the most potentially destructive. It is also repugnant on a deeper level: cheapens what love actually is. The flip coin emotion of rooted hated has more in common than abstracting liking someone, as if they were a meal.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @nebulafox


    The flip coin emotion of rooted hated has more in common than abstracting liking someone, as if they were a meal.
     
    Whut?

    Replies: @Unintended Consequence

    , @Anonymous
    @nebulafox


    The modern mainstream pushes a lot of bad ideas, but conflating love with the relatively sterile, inoffensive feeling of liking someone as an individual has to rank up there as one of the most potentially destructive.
     
    What is so destructive about it?
  90. @The Germ Theory of Disease
    @nokangaroos

    "(leaving the necessary task of attracting wimmin to “conspicuous consumption”
    read: bling)."

    The thing that all young men need to be taught is: women can be attracted by money or power, by looks or charisma, or by bling, but in my experience, the thing that attracts women far more effectively, by an order of magnitude, is: prowess. Observable, detectable expertise.

    Get good at something. Better still, become an expert at something. And the "something" must have two qualities (at least as far as attracting women is concerned):

    a) There must be opportunities for public display of prowess, and
    b) There has to be a risk factor involved: the possibility of success or failure, winning or losing.

    Prowess is not demonstrated at a poetry reading, because nothing can notionally go wrong, you can't actually "fail" so neither have you triumphed. If you get laid after a poetry reading, it was because of charisma and/or looks, not prowess.

    Prowess is why rock stars and athletes get laid. There is public risk on the line, and they triumph over it.

    When I was a young man, I was average-looking, always badly dressed, and dead broke, but I was blessed with a certain type of expertise which I had cultivated since childhood.

    Guess what? Beautiful rich chicks didn't mind picking up the check at dinner. Or paying for the hotel room.

    Get good at something, young man.

    Replies: @Intelligent Dasein, @nebulafox, @kaganovitch, @Twinkie, @Anon

    >I was blessed with a certain type of expertise which I had cultivated since childhood.

    ?

  91. Since CrossFit related stupidity seems to have permeated this site, here are basic stats:

    “Approximately 216,000 to 432,000 people do CrossFit worldwide. Fifty percent are women. Conservative estimate: 108,000 women do CrossFit worldwide. Only a fraction of those are elite athletes. Over 50% have yearly income of \$150k and 40% have post-doctoral degrees (starting to sound like typical military recruits yet?). Vast majority are in 24-34 age group. Huge drop off before age 25 and after age 34.

    There are approximately 172 million women in the US alone. If every CrossFit woman lived in the US the percent of the female population engaged in CrossFit at any level would be 0.00062.

    Oh, and popularity appears to be dropping.

    The Army better start changing their plans!!

    • Thanks: The Wild Geese Howard
  92. @Intelligent Dasein
    @The Germ Theory of Disease


    Prowess is not demonstrated at a poetry reading, because nothing can notionally go wrong, you can’t actually “fail” so neither have you triumphed. If you get laid after a poetry reading, it was because of charisma and/or looks, not prowess.

    Prowess is why rock stars and athletes get laid. There is public risk on the line, and they triumph over it.
     
    I have to object at this point. There is no essential difference between performing at a poetry reading and performing at a rock concert. A rock concert is just a poetry reading backed by drums and guitars. Similarly, you definitely have to have "prowess" with the spoken word in order to read poetry convincingly in public. Some people are quite mesmerizing at this, and the rest of us "fail" at it.

    Replies: @The Germ Theory of Disease

    You should go to more poetry readings and rock concerts, then you’d spot the difference.

    Kidding aside, I take your point, but the larger point is: scale matters. If you’re Frank O’Hara or Allen Ginsberg, then your reading comes off well. There aren’t a lot of Franks and Allens, and certainly not as many as there are wannabe Eddie van Halens, or even Snoop Doggs.

    nebulafox says “?”

    What’s the big deal? You never heard of someone working their ass off in their youth, and then getting rewarded later? It’s pretty common, really.

    • Replies: @ScarletNumber
    @The Germ Theory of Disease

    More common is someone working very hard, but getting little-to-no reward from it

  93. @The Germ Theory of Disease
    @nokangaroos

    "(leaving the necessary task of attracting wimmin to “conspicuous consumption”
    read: bling)."

    The thing that all young men need to be taught is: women can be attracted by money or power, by looks or charisma, or by bling, but in my experience, the thing that attracts women far more effectively, by an order of magnitude, is: prowess. Observable, detectable expertise.

    Get good at something. Better still, become an expert at something. And the "something" must have two qualities (at least as far as attracting women is concerned):

    a) There must be opportunities for public display of prowess, and
    b) There has to be a risk factor involved: the possibility of success or failure, winning or losing.

    Prowess is not demonstrated at a poetry reading, because nothing can notionally go wrong, you can't actually "fail" so neither have you triumphed. If you get laid after a poetry reading, it was because of charisma and/or looks, not prowess.

    Prowess is why rock stars and athletes get laid. There is public risk on the line, and they triumph over it.

    When I was a young man, I was average-looking, always badly dressed, and dead broke, but I was blessed with a certain type of expertise which I had cultivated since childhood.

    Guess what? Beautiful rich chicks didn't mind picking up the check at dinner. Or paying for the hotel room.

    Get good at something, young man.

    Replies: @Intelligent Dasein, @nebulafox, @kaganovitch, @Twinkie, @Anon

    When I was a young man, I was average-looking, always badly dressed, and dead broke, but I was blessed with a certain type of expertise which I had cultivated since childhood.

    Pickpocket?

  94. @nebulafox
    @Twinkie

    >My parents fell madly in love with each other, but they were not a good fit temperamentally. They quickly grew to dislike each other in marriage, but they still loved each other.

    I know that situation. Saying it's not fun is a gross understatement.

    The modern mainstream pushes a lot of bad ideas, but conflating love with the relatively sterile, inoffensive feeling of liking someone as an individual has to rank up there as one of the most potentially destructive. It is also repugnant on a deeper level: cheapens what love actually is. The flip coin emotion of rooted hated has more in common than abstracting liking someone, as if they were a meal.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Anonymous

    The flip coin emotion of rooted hated has more in common than abstracting liking someone, as if they were a meal.

    Whut?

    • Replies: @Unintended Consequence
    @Twinkie

    I think nebulafox means that the opposite of love is indifference while hate is still love expressed in a very negative way or something.

    Personally, I'd settle for being liked unless for Twinkie "like" = "tasty". Come to think of it, I wouldn't mind being tasty either unless thought to be so by a cannibal.

  95. @Twinkie
    @nebulafox


    The flip coin emotion of rooted hated has more in common than abstracting liking someone, as if they were a meal.
     
    Whut?

    Replies: @Unintended Consequence

    I think nebulafox means that the opposite of love is indifference while hate is still love expressed in a very negative way or something.

    Personally, I’d settle for being liked unless for Twinkie “like” = “tasty”. Come to think of it, I wouldn’t mind being tasty either unless thought to be so by a cannibal.

  96. @The Germ Theory of Disease
    @nokangaroos

    "(leaving the necessary task of attracting wimmin to “conspicuous consumption”
    read: bling)."

    The thing that all young men need to be taught is: women can be attracted by money or power, by looks or charisma, or by bling, but in my experience, the thing that attracts women far more effectively, by an order of magnitude, is: prowess. Observable, detectable expertise.

    Get good at something. Better still, become an expert at something. And the "something" must have two qualities (at least as far as attracting women is concerned):

    a) There must be opportunities for public display of prowess, and
    b) There has to be a risk factor involved: the possibility of success or failure, winning or losing.

    Prowess is not demonstrated at a poetry reading, because nothing can notionally go wrong, you can't actually "fail" so neither have you triumphed. If you get laid after a poetry reading, it was because of charisma and/or looks, not prowess.

    Prowess is why rock stars and athletes get laid. There is public risk on the line, and they triumph over it.

    When I was a young man, I was average-looking, always badly dressed, and dead broke, but I was blessed with a certain type of expertise which I had cultivated since childhood.

    Guess what? Beautiful rich chicks didn't mind picking up the check at dinner. Or paying for the hotel room.

    Get good at something, young man.

    Replies: @Intelligent Dasein, @nebulafox, @kaganovitch, @Twinkie, @Anon

    Get good at something, young man.

    Excellent advice, but…

    a) There must be opportunities for public display of prowess, and
    b) There has to be a risk factor involved: the possibility of success or failure, winning or losing.

    This is not necessarily true. Yes, there are many women who are attracted to men who are daring and courageous. But there are other women who are drawn to men who are artistically (drawing, painting, music, etc.) or verbally (poetry, telling jokes, etc.) polished and skillful.

    Your last sentence is right on the money. When men, especially young men, are accomplished and excel at things (obvious endeavors such as athletics, academics, the arts, or moneymaking, but also somethings as silly as, say, magic tricks or juggling), it sends a message to women that the men in question are capable of dedication and drive to achieve something unusual, characteristics that distinguish them from “ordinary” people and make them stand out. This is appealing to women.

    Now, the specifics of those “achievements” will dictate the types of women who are thusly attracted. My wife was attracted to me for my intelligence, gallantry, athletic prowess, sense of humor, and, most of all, my general traditional/gentlemanly masculinity. Of course, she herself was also a standout athlete who came from a very traditional family and appreciated those qualities. Before her I dated other young women, some of who told my friends that they quickly lost interest in me, because I was “too square” or “too straight arrow” or just plain “too conservative.” Those women were clearly not my crowd – most of them ended up dating the kind of guys who played guitar in a band or were artsy (though I think many, perhaps most, of them, judging from the class news section of the alumni magazine, eventually went on to marry lawyers, doctors, investment bankers, IT executives, and so on).

    When I was a young man, I found that, despite my initial inexperience and naivete, it was actually pretty easy to gain the initial interest of women. The first year in college, as a challenge to myself, I proceeded to memorize the names and home cities of almost every freshman co-ed in the directory. Occasionally at parties, when I found a girl attractive, I’d approach her, introduce myself, get her name and then say, “Hey, you’re from so-and-so town, aren’t you?” A lot of girls would be surprised and intrigued by this stupid trick (of course, I tried to be mysterious about it whenever they were puzzled and asked, “How did you know?” and sometimes would attribute it to accents or mannerisms and such, which occasionally backfired when the girl in question turned out to have grown up elsewhere and only lived in her “hometown” for a year or two).

    So, yeah, at least in the short term, be unusual, stand out, and be good at something. To sustain the interest though and form a more lasting relationship, you have to be something else and more, but that’s another topic for another day.

  97. @Hangnail Hans
    @Twinkie

    Also, a female boss is generally able to discipline (or even fire) deadweight without bringing on civil rights lawsuits.

    Replies: @Twinkie

    Also, a female boss is generally able to discipline (or even fire) deadweight without bringing on civil rights lawsuits.

    In some cases (other females, mostly), yes. But even a woman boss has to be exceedingly careful about firing blacks, women or men, and occasionally Hispanics.

  98. @Curle
    @prosa123

    https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/women-in-combat-lets-get-real/article7879189/


    “The Army’s physical fitness test in basic training is a three-event physical performance test used to assess endurance. The minimum requirement for 17- to 21-year-old males is 35 pushups, 47 situps and a two-mile run in 16 minutes, 36 seconds or less. For females of the same age, the minimum requirement is 13 pushups, 47 situps and a 19:42 two-mile run. Why the difference in fitness requirements? “USMC Women in the Service Restrictions Review” found that women, on average, have 20 percent lower aerobic power, 40 percent lower muscle strength, 47 percent less lifting strength and 26 percent slower marching speed than men.”

    https://www.theintell.com/story/opinion/2013/02/04/women-in-combat-they-re/17266658007/

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Hibernian

    Forty seven situps for both men and women is a result of ideology; they can claim that women meet the same standards in one event. Previously, women had to meet higher standards in this event, because it involves pelvic muscles to a high degree. Which is better, saying women have to meet higher standards in one event to partially make up for their deficiencies in others, or to say “Yipee!” because of equal standards in one event? The powers that be chose the latter. That is to say, they chose irrationality, as they almost always do.

  99. @The Germ Theory of Disease
    @Intelligent Dasein

    You should go to more poetry readings and rock concerts, then you'd spot the difference.

    Kidding aside, I take your point, but the larger point is: scale matters. If you're Frank O'Hara or Allen Ginsberg, then your reading comes off well. There aren't a lot of Franks and Allens, and certainly not as many as there are wannabe Eddie van Halens, or even Snoop Doggs.

    nebulafox says "?"

    What's the big deal? You never heard of someone working their ass off in their youth, and then getting rewarded later? It's pretty common, really.

    Replies: @ScarletNumber

    More common is someone working very hard, but getting little-to-no reward from it

  100. anonymous[102] • Disclaimer says:
    @prosa123
    @Curle

    You see, you "Men" of Unz assume that women are too frail and weak to be in the military, and therefore men have to do all the fighting and dying, when the CrossFit Games plainly show that women are capable of way more than you'd ever imagine. Very few if any of these ultra-strong women are genetic freaks. They're just normal women who train very hard. Certainly more that a typical woman would need to train to be able to fight in combat.

    And by the way, the CrossFit Games test for steroids.

    Replies: @Intelligent Dasein, @Curle, @anonymous

    If a society is going to favor women over men, as ours does, then we need more women dying at the front lines of battle. Seems fair: those that are given more, should be prepared to sacrifice more for the society that favors them. I’m all for women getting gunned down in combat. The more the merrier.

    • Replies: @nokangaroos
    @anonymous

    H. J. Stammel called it "the Mom as national trauma" and speculated
    American gynocracy was caused by initial shortage of women;
    the Aussie adaptation to the same constraint (the mildly homoerotic "buddy"
    system) is infinitely more agreeable.

  101. @anonymous
    @prosa123

    If a society is going to favor women over men, as ours does, then we need more women dying at the front lines of battle. Seems fair: those that are given more, should be prepared to sacrifice more for the society that favors them. I'm all for women getting gunned down in combat. The more the merrier.

    Replies: @nokangaroos

    H. J. Stammel called it “the Mom as national trauma” and speculated
    American gynocracy was caused by initial shortage of women;
    the Aussie adaptation to the same constraint (the mildly homoerotic “buddy”
    system) is infinitely more agreeable.

  102. @Wade Hampton
    @Twinkie

    My father was the smartest, most modest, kindest, best beloved person on the planet. My mother loved him and there was never, never any violence in my home.

    One line of his that I remember was something along the lines of "never hit a woman, unless she hits you first."

    Replies: @HammerJack

    Hey! I remember your first sentence
    —from The Manchurian Candidate!

  103. @nebulafox
    @Twinkie

    >My parents fell madly in love with each other, but they were not a good fit temperamentally. They quickly grew to dislike each other in marriage, but they still loved each other.

    I know that situation. Saying it's not fun is a gross understatement.

    The modern mainstream pushes a lot of bad ideas, but conflating love with the relatively sterile, inoffensive feeling of liking someone as an individual has to rank up there as one of the most potentially destructive. It is also repugnant on a deeper level: cheapens what love actually is. The flip coin emotion of rooted hated has more in common than abstracting liking someone, as if they were a meal.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Anonymous

    The modern mainstream pushes a lot of bad ideas, but conflating love with the relatively sterile, inoffensive feeling of liking someone as an individual has to rank up there as one of the most potentially destructive.

    What is so destructive about it?

  104. @The Germ Theory of Disease
    @nokangaroos

    "(leaving the necessary task of attracting wimmin to “conspicuous consumption”
    read: bling)."

    The thing that all young men need to be taught is: women can be attracted by money or power, by looks or charisma, or by bling, but in my experience, the thing that attracts women far more effectively, by an order of magnitude, is: prowess. Observable, detectable expertise.

    Get good at something. Better still, become an expert at something. And the "something" must have two qualities (at least as far as attracting women is concerned):

    a) There must be opportunities for public display of prowess, and
    b) There has to be a risk factor involved: the possibility of success or failure, winning or losing.

    Prowess is not demonstrated at a poetry reading, because nothing can notionally go wrong, you can't actually "fail" so neither have you triumphed. If you get laid after a poetry reading, it was because of charisma and/or looks, not prowess.

    Prowess is why rock stars and athletes get laid. There is public risk on the line, and they triumph over it.

    When I was a young man, I was average-looking, always badly dressed, and dead broke, but I was blessed with a certain type of expertise which I had cultivated since childhood.

    Guess what? Beautiful rich chicks didn't mind picking up the check at dinner. Or paying for the hotel room.

    Get good at something, young man.

    Replies: @Intelligent Dasein, @nebulafox, @kaganovitch, @Twinkie, @Anon

    When I was a young man, I was average-looking, always badly dressed, and dead broke, but I was blessed with a certain type of expertise which I had cultivated since childhood.

    What expertise was it in?

  105. John Knox looked at the Women Problem back in about 1580. The title says it all.

    The First Blast of the Trumpet against the monstrous regiment of Women

    Kindle edition now free.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World
Our Reigning Political Puppets, Dancing to Invisible Strings
The Surprising Elements of Talmudic Judaism
Shouldn't they recuse themselves when dealing with the Middle East?